Decision search
Your search has 52604 results
-
Hampshire County Council (25 006 801)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 08-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that the Council is taking too long to provide information she requested under a subject access request. This is because there is another body – the Information Commissioner’s Office – better placed to consider this complaint.
-
London Borough of Haringey (25 006 927)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 08-Jul-2025
Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council failing to clear an overgrown garden at one of its properties. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about the management of social housing by a council acting as a social landlord.
-
London Borough of Ealing (24 002 012)
Statement Not upheld Disabled facilities grants 08-Jul-2025
Summary: Ms B complained that the Council had failed to rectify leak damage in her bathroom following works under a Disabled Facilities grant. We have not found fault with the Council’s actions.
-
Cheshire East Council (24 008 495)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 08-Jul-2025
Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to secure the full special educational provision in Mrs X’s daughter, Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. It was also at fault for delay in completing a review of Y’s EHC Plan. The faults caused Mrs X upset, frustration and uncertainty and meant Y missed out on some provision. To remedy their injustice, the Council will apologise to Mrs X and Y and pay Mrs X a total of £1000.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 009 158)
Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 08-Jul-2025
Summary: Miss X complained that the Council failed to take steps to ensure Ms Y’s finances were managed. The Council was at fault for not putting an appointee in place for Ms Y, meaning she did not have access to funds while in residential care, however the Council has already remedied the injustice caused.
-
London Borough of Havering (24 010 150)
Statement Not upheld Enforcement 08-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about a Council planning decision for an extension on his neighbours, Y’s, land. Mr X said Y’s extension had not been built in accordance with the approved plans and the Council had delayed taking enforcement action. We have ended this investigation because Y submitted a retrospective planning application and it was unlikely to result in a finding of fault, a remedy for Mr X or any other meaningful outcome.
-
Shropshire Council (24 010 210)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 08-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the work carried out by the Council in default of an Enforcement Notice. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions. Also, we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.
-
London Borough of Croydon (24 012 254)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 08-Jul-2025
Summary: Ms X complained that the Council delayed in processing her Section 202 review request about the suitability of the temporary accommodation offered to her. Ms X says this caused her distress. Based on current evidence we have found fault in the Council’s actions but do not recommend a remedy.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 013 203)
Statement Upheld Alternative provision 08-Jul-2025
Summary: The Council was at fault in how it decided whether to arrange alternative education provision for Mrs X’s child, W. This caused Mrs X frustration, uncertainty and frustration and meant W missed out on two terms of provision. To remedy their injustice, the Council will pay Mrs X a total of £1350 and apologise to her. It will also issue a reminder and clarification to staff so the fault does not happen again.
-
London Borough of Wandsworth (24 014 198)
Statement Not upheld Building control 08-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council’s handling of a building control matter. This is because the substantive issue concerns a dispute over whether Mr X’s building work complies with the Building Regulations and it would be reasonable for Mr X to take this to the Planning Inspector.