Nottinghamshire County Council
Complaint overview
Between 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, we dealt with 85 complaints. Of these, 21 were not for us or not ready for us to investigate. We assessed and closed 48 complaints. We investigated 16 complaints.
More about this data
Complaints dealt with – the total number of complaints and enquiries considered. It is not appropriate to investigate all of them.
Not for us – includes complaints brought to us before the council was given chance to consider it, or the complainant came to the wrong Ombudsman.
Assessed and closed – includes complaints where the law says we’re not allowed to investigate, or it would be a poor use of public funds if we did.
Investigated – we completed an investigation and made a decision on whether we found fault, or no fault.
Complaints upheld – we completed an investigation and found evidence of fault, or the organisation provided a suitable remedy early on.
Satisfactory remedies provided by the Council – the council upheld the complaint and we agreed with how it offered to put things right.
Compliance with Ombudsman recommendations – not complying with our recommendations is rare. A council with a compliance rate below 100% should scrutinise the complaints where it failed to comply and identify any learning.
Average performance rates – we compare the annual statistics of similar types of councils to work out an average level of performance. We do this for County Councils, District Councils, Metropolitan Boroughs, Unitary Councils, and London Boroughs.
For more information on understanding our statistics see Interpreting our complaints data.
Complaints dealt with
Not for us
Assessed and closed
Investigated
-
Complaints upheld
We investigated 16 complaints and upheld 14.
88% of complaints we investigated were upheld.
This compares to an average of 89% in similar authorities.
View upheld decisionsAdjusted for Nottinghamshire County Council's population, this is 1.7 upheld decisions per 100,000 residents.
The average for authorities of this type is
5.3 upheld decisions per 100,000 residents. -
Satisfactory remedies provided by the Council
In 1 out of 14 upheld cases we found the Council had provided a satisfactory remedy before the complaint reached the Ombudsman.
7% satisfactory remedy rate.
This compares to an average of 10% in similar authorities.
-
Compliance with Ombudsman recommendations
We recorded compliance outcomes in 14 cases.
In 14 cases we were satisfied with the actions taken.100% compliance rate with recommendations.
This compares to an average of 100% in similar authorities.
Annual letters
We write to councils each year to give a summary of the complaint statistics we record about them,
and their performance in responding to our investigations.
Reports
The Ombudsman has published the following reports against Nottinghamshire County Council
Find out more about reports
We issue reports on certain investigations, particularly where there is a wider public interest to do so. Common reasons for reports are significant injustice, systemic issues, major learning points and non-compliance with our recommendations. Issuing reports is one way we help to ensure councils are accountable to local people and highlighting the learning from complaints helps to improve services for everybody. Reports are published for 10 years.
Notts mum should be refunded nursery charges following Ombudsman investigation
Nottinghamshire County Council has been told to repay a mum half the additional charges she paid for nearly two years because it did not properly oversee a nursery’s charging policy.
Son banned from visiting mum in Notts care home following dispute
A Nottinghamshire man was barred from visiting his mother after he raised concerns about her welfare to the care home in which she was living, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has found.
Man denied Human Rights because of council delay
Nottinghamshire County Council left a man in a care home away from his family for five months, without having any regard for his basic human rights, a Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman investigation has found.
Nottinghamshire man’s care package reduced because of financial pressures, Ombudsman finds
A Nottinghamshire man with autism was left relying on his parents to part-fund his care when the county council cut his package without identifying a suitable alternative, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has found.
Unfair admission arrangement changes force siblings into separate schools
Nottinghamshire County Council has agreed to pay two families £500 a year because their children missed out on places at their preferred schools after it unfairly changed admissions arrangements, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has said.
Man banned from visiting relative in her care home without proper assessment
A man was banned from visiting his partner’s mother in her care home when Nottinghamshire County Council failed to go through the correct procedures, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has found.
Service improvements
The Council has agreed to make the following improvements to its services following an Ombudsman investigation.
Find out more about service improvements
When we find fault, we can recommend improvements to systems and processes where they haven’t worked properly, so that others do not suffer from these same problems in future. Common examples are policy changes; procedural reviews; and staff training. Service improvements from decisions are published for 5 years and those from reports are published for 10 years.
The latest 10 cases are listed below – click ‘view all’ to find all service improvements.
Case reference: 25 000 184
Category: Adult care services
Sub Category: Assessment and care plan
- The Council failed to carry out a new mental capacity assessment when it changed its view on a person's capacity to decide on their care needs. The Council has agreed to review its processes and train staff to ensure if there is a change in its assessment of someone’s capacity, this is based on a mental capacity assessment.
Case reference: 24 021 977
Category: Education
Sub Category: Special educational needs
- The Council will ensure that it responds to parent requests for evidence in an EHC needs assessment in writing setting out whether the request has been agreed and if not, why the Council does not consider the request to be reasonable.
Case reference: 24 021 386
Category: Adult care services
Sub Category: Safeguarding
- Remind Home 1 to ensure that care plans are adhered to.
- Remind Home 1 and Home 2 of the importance of good record keeping.
Case reference: 24 021 176
Category: Environment and regulation
Sub Category: Trading standards
- Send a reminder to Trading Standards officers that they should record the reasons for not prosecuting in the investigation documents, so there is evidence of Trading Standards decision making.
Case reference: 24 020 005
Category: Education
Sub Category: Special educational needs
- The Council agreed to remind relevant officers of the need to check and explore whether teachers and teaching assistants referred to in Education Health and Care plans meet any specified criteria set out.
- The Council agreed to remind relevant officers of the need to consider whether, in cases where teachers and teaching assistants referred to in Education Health and Care plans do not meet specified criteria set out, the provider, or the tutor themselves could take appropriate action to resolve the problem.
- The Council agreed to remind relevant officers of the need to promptly consider looking for an alternative tutor where teachers and teaching assistants referred to in Education Health and Care plans do not meet any specified criteria set out.
Case reference: 24 016 102
Category: Education
Sub Category: Special educational needs
- The Council was at fault for failing to ensure a child received the specialist provision set out in their Education Health and Care Plan following a SEND (Special Education Needs and Disabilities) tribunal hearing in July 2024. The Council has agreed to provide a copy of the tribunal triage process the Council has implemented to ensure that actions following an appeal are completed.
Case reference: 24 010 840
Category: Adult care services
Sub Category: Assessment and care plan
- The Council has agreed to share the decision with relevant Adult Social Care staff at team meetings and discuss the learning from the case regarding the support provided to care home residents who are able to make their own decisions and want to go home.
Case reference: 24 010 774
Category: Children's care services
Sub Category: Disabled children
- The Council agreed that it would share this decision statement with officers responsible for administering Disabled Facilities Grants in local housing authorities (District and Borough Councils) across the county. It would also share with those authorities a policy it would devise to ensure better information sharing. We were concerned to ensure housing authorities knew about occupational therapy (OT) assessments that decided a DFG was not necessary or appropriate . This was because such decisions were taken on behalf of those housing authorities. Also, to ensure that those authorities knew of the significant delays affecting the County OT service and that unsuccessful applicants knew of their right to complain to the housing authority, as well as (or instead of) the County in such cases.
- The Council also agreed that it would bring this decision statement to the attention of the relevant committee of elected Members with oversight of its OT service. In doing so, officers agreed to brief Members on Government guidance setting out the desired timescales for completing DFG applications, which presently cannot be met because of delays in OT assessments. The Council agreed it would put forward proposals to Members for how it could reduce those delays to meet Government expectations or as close as reasonably practicable.
Case reference: 24 001 433
Category: Education
Sub Category: Alternative provision
- The Council will review its processes in place for children on part-time timetable or not attending school to ensure there are mechanisms to make timely decisions on theCouncil’s alternative provision duty following the test set up in paragraph 29 of this decision.
- The Council will remind the front-line special educational needs (SEN) staff and their managers of the Council’s duties for children who are not attending their school. The SEN staff will review our Focus Report “Outof school, out of sight? Ensuring children out of school get a good education”.
Case reference: 24 000 894
Category: Education
Sub Category: Alternative provision
- The Council has agreed to remind all officers who respond to education complaints, of the Council’s duties under section 19 of the Education Act. In particular that it is the Council’s responsibility to make decisions about whether alternative provision is required for a child - not the school’s - and ensure its complaint responses reflect that.
Last updated: 4 April 2015