Decision search
Your search has 54634 results
-
Mansfield District Council (25 009 354)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Leisure and culture 07-Sep-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about grass cutting at a nature reserve. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and there is no evidence the Council has caused Mr X a significant personal injustice.
-
Leeds City Council (25 009 516)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 07-Sep-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax liability because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.
-
London Borough of Barnet (25 009 665)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 07-Sep-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an empty homes Council tax premium because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.
-
Charnwood Borough Council (25 009 920)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 07-Sep-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council tax discount because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.
-
Darlington Borough Council (25 010 076)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 07-Sep-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council tax discount and fine because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.
-
Nottinghamshire County Council (25 012 102)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 07-Sep-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse a home to school transport application. It is unlikely we would find fault.
-
London Borough of Bromley (24 019 717)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 05-Sep-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay and failure in communication on the Council’s part. The fault the complainant has identified is not separable from the process of amending his daughter’s Education Health and Care plan and, as such, does not fall to be investigated by the Ombudsman.
-
Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (24 016 885)
Statement Upheld Direct payments 04-Sep-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to end direct payments to his relative Mr Z. There was no fault in the way the Council reached its decision. There was fault in its communication with Mr Z and in its failure to ensure there was a proper coordinated handover of care. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr Z to acknowledge the uncertainty and distress this caused him. The Council also failed to properly explore Mr Z’s request for a day centre and Mr and Mrs X’s request for respite. It has agreed to apologise to Mr and Mrs X for the uncertainty caused, review Mr Z’s care needs assessment and carry out new carer’s assessments of Mr and Mrs X.
-
Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council (24 017 790)
Statement Upheld Alternative provision 04-Sep-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide education for her child who has been absent from school since January 2024. We found fault with the Council failing to ensure Y had access to suitable education for time periods totalling two terms and one week from 21 February 2024 to 21 March 2025. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X and pay her £3,325 for Y’s missed education. The Council also agreed to remind staff about the importance of acting in line with government guidance over timescales for considering its Section 19 duty. And, the Council agreed to provide training to staff about how it should consider and carry out its Section 19 duty.
-
Derbyshire County Council (24 017 854)
Statement Upheld School transport 04-Sep-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council wrongly refused to award transport for her son Mr Y who is over 19 and has an Education Health and Care Plan. She also said the Council had failed to carry out transport appeal properly, communicate with her and respond to her complaint. We found fault in the way the Council made its decision about transport for Mr Y and in the way it handled Mrs X’s appeal. This fault caused injustice to Mrs X as she was distressed and could not be satisfied her appeal was properly considered. The Council has agreed to apologise, re-take a decision on Mrs X’s new transport application and make a distress payment.