Decision search
Your search has 54735 results
-
Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (24 015 380)
Statement Upheld Refuse and recycling 07-Aug-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council repeatedly missed her daughter Ms Y’s household waste collections and failed to resolve the issues despite repeated reports. The Council delivered a poor service, failed to resolve reported issues, and issued a poor response to Ms X’s complaint about this. This caused avoidable distress to Ms Y because of a loss of service, and avoidable distress, time, and trouble to Ms X in complaining on her behalf. The Council agreed to apologise, pay a financial remedy to Ms Y and Ms X, and monitor Ms Y’s bin collections to resolve any issues. It will also issue staff reminders, review how it keeps records of missed bin reports, and ensure proper oversight of the review that its third-party waste contractor is carrying out about failings in the service.
-
Bracknell Forest Council (24 016 166)
Statement Upheld School transport 07-Aug-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to follow government guidance when deciding the route Y’s school transport should take. We find the Council at fault for failing to evidence its decision-making process and for providing incorrect information, creating uncertainty for Mr X. The Council should apologise, make a symbolic payment to recognise the injustice, and act to prevent recurrence.
-
Rutland County Council (24 016 225)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 07-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to concerns Mrs X has about a family relation. This is because there is not sufficient evidence of fault for parts of her complaint and as to the other parts, it is not likely investigation would lead to a different outcome.
-
Staffordshire County Council (24 016 283)
Statement Upheld Charging 07-Aug-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about the way the Council decided to discharge her mother, Mrs Y, to a care home without considering whether Mrs Y could return home with a care package. Mrs X said she was ignored and not given any advice or help while she was applying for deputyship which took two years. Mrs X says the Council are now chasing her for £90,000 of outstanding care home fees. We have found fault in the Councils actions for failing to consider Mrs Y returning home and for the information it provided Mrs X about the costs of a care home and applying for deputyship. The Council agrees to apologise to Mrs X, complete service improvements and pay Mrs X a financial payment.
-
Manchester City Council (24 017 007)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 07-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about unsuitable temporary accommodation. The Council has already accepted fault and agreed to remedy the injustice by making a payment to Mr X in line with our guidance on remedies. Further investigation by us would not be proportionate as it is unlikely we could achieve anything further.
-
T.L. Care Limited (24 017 699)
Statement Upheld Residential care 07-Aug-2025
Summary: The Care Home responded to Mrs Y’s reports of uncleanliness in her father, Mr X’s, room. The Care Home was at fault for not trying to engage Mr X in activities. On balance, I cannot say this contributed to Mr X’s death. The Care Home has agreed to apologise to Mrs Y.
-
Cheshire West & Chester Council (24 011 919)
Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 07-Aug-2025
Summary: Mrs X complains about failings and lack of support from the Council’s adult social care services when her late sister, Miss Y, was discharged from hospital into residential care. Mrs X said the care homes where Miss Y stayed were unsuitable and the Council did not provide adequate charging information. Mrs X was left with a large invoice for Miss Y’s care. We found the Council was not at fault in sourcing residential care placements, or in the charging information it gave. The Council accepted it took too long to allocate a social care assessor and apologised.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 012 760)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 07-Aug-2025
Summary: Mr B complained about the accommodation the Council has provided since he and his family became homeless. We find that the Council failed to provide suitable accommodation. It placed the family in bed and breakfast accommodation for around 16 weeks, 10 weeks over the maximum time such accommodation can be used for homeless applicants with dependent children. The Council then placed the family in unsuitable accommodation, which is statutorily overcrowded and where they have to share facilities with other families. They have been living there for around 21 months. The Council has agreed to immediately move the family to suitable accommodation, apologise and make a payment to Mr B. It has also agreed to make service improvements.
-
London Borough of Redbridge (24 017 727)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 07-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Ms C’s complaint about her housing situation. This is because the information does not indicate the Council was at fault for the way it has considered Ms C’s housing application. And, the Council has agreed to review the suitability of Ms C’s temporary accommodation.
-
London Borough of Brent (24 018 156)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 07-Aug-2025
Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council dealt with her homelessness application. She said she is homeless, and this impacted her mental health. There was fault as the Council did not provide Miss X with accommodation after accepting a duty to her and communication was poor. Miss X lived in unsuitable accommodation for 18 months. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a financial payment.