Decision search
Your search has 54124 results
-
Eastbourne Borough Council (24 017 486)
Statement Upheld Antisocial behaviour 08-Oct-2025
Summary: Mrs B says the Council failed to act on noise nuisance and breached data protection regulations. The Council failed to investigate Mrs B’s noise complaints in accordance with its procedure and breached data protection regulations. That caused Mrs B distress. An apology, discussion with Mrs B about installing noise recording equipment and arranging for officers to visit to witness the noise and training for officers is satisfactory remedy.
-
Statement Not upheld Noise 08-Oct-2025
Summary: We have completed our investigation into how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint about a statutory nuisance from a nearby ventilation system. This is because we find no fault with the way the Council made its decisions.
-
Leicester City Council (24 021 368)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 08-Oct-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide the provision set out in her son’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. We found the Council’s failure to ensure Y received the speech and language therapy (SALT) set out in his EHC Plan is fault. This fault has caused an injustice. Mrs X has incurred costs in employing a private therapist to try and mitigate the impact of the missed SALT provision on her son. The Council will apologise, make payments and take action to remedy the injustice.
-
Kent County Council (24 021 571)
Statement Upheld Child protection 08-Oct-2025
Summary: Ms X complained that the Council failed to consider a safeguarding complaint she made. The Council is not at fault for how it made its decision on Ms X’s safeguarding complaint. It followed its Local Authority Designated Officer policy and statutory guidance. However, there is fault in the way it communicated its decision to Ms X. This caused Ms X confusion and distress. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and write to her to explain the reasons for its decision.
-
London Borough of Ealing (24 021 647)
Statement Upheld Looked after children 08-Oct-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to provide her with the correct support when she left care. She said there were delays by the Council in investigating her complaint and its offer of a symbolic financial payment was not enough to remedy the injustice caused to her. We found the Council at fault for failing to provide an appropriate remedy to Ms X. This fault caused injustice to Ms X. The Council will make a higher payment to recognise Ms X’s distress.
-
Buckinghamshire Council (24 022 056)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 08-Oct-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to issue a Certificate of Lawfulness for his neighbour’s dropped kerb. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.
-
West Sussex County Council (24 022 356)
Statement Upheld Charging 08-Oct-2025
Summary: Miss Z on behalf of her mother, Mrs X, complained the Council failed to provide information about the cost of a care home, delayed in completing the financial assessment and sending an invoice and then wrongly assessed Ms X’s savings. There is no fault in the Council’s calculations but it did delay completing this. The apology already provided by the Council is a suitable remedy.
-
London Borough of Redbridge (24 022 800)
Statement Upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 08-Oct-2025
Summary: We have upheld Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his Right to Buy application. The Council accepts there was an error in the sale price used and has reinstated the offer, based on the valuation price. This puts Mr X back to the position he would have been in but for that error and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
-
London Borough of Haringey (24 023 222)
Statement Upheld Parking and other penalties 08-Oct-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to not remove a redundant dropped kerb on his street. He also complained of poor communication and said the Council gave conflicting information about which residents are permitted to park over the dropped kerbs on his street. We have decided not to investigate the Council’s decision not to remove the dropped kerb, as there is no significant injustice to justify doing so. However, we have investigated Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s poor communication. We find the Council at fault. This has caused Mr X frustration, and he has spent time and trouble attempting to seek clarity on the issue. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and issue written reminders to staff.
-
Norfolk County Council (24 023 290)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 08-Oct-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to maintain her child’s Education, Health and Care plan after she moved into the Council’s area. She says the Council reduced the provision, refused to provide agreed budget payments and did not meet its own deadlines for response times to her complaint. We found the Council at fault, which caused Mrs X injustice. The Council should make payment and apologise to Mrs X.