There are 8 results (please note that to maintain confidentiality, we do not publish all our decisions)
-
Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (22 016 474)
Statement Upheld Antisocial behaviour 29-Apr-2024
Summary: Mr D says the Council delayed handling his high hedge application. We have found evidence of substantial delays by the Council. We have upheld the complaint and completed the investigation because the Council agrees to pay redress and implement procedural guidance for staff.
-
Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (23 018 947)
Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 29-Jul-2024
Summary: Ms Y complained that professionals failed to understand her mother’s personality and wrongly determined she lacked capacity. Ms Y said this led to a decision to transfer her mother to a nursing home which caused her distress. In addition, she said it led to a hospital and a nursing home placing unnecessary restrictions on her mother. We have not found fault in the way professionals considered Mrs X’s capacity. However, we have found fault in the way a Council considered Mrs X’s best interests before placing her in a nursing home. This caused avoidable distress and we have recommended an apology and a small financial payment.
-
Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (23 015 461)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 04-Aug-2024
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his child, F’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan during 2023. The Council delayed issuing F’s amended EHC Plan following two annual reviews during 2023. It also failed to give clear feedback about its decision not to include some provision in the plan. The Council agreed to make payments to Mr X to acknowledge the injustice this caused. Mr X’s complaint about the decision not to include therapy provision in F’s EHC Plan is outside of our jurisdiction as he appealed this to the SEND tribunal.
-
Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (23 015 502)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 04-Aug-2024
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his son, F’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan when it was transferred over from another council area in September 2023. The Council failed to deal with F’s EHC Plan transfer in line with relevant law and guidance. This caused Mr X distress and uncertainty and impacted on F’s education between September and November 2023. Events from November 2023 onwards are outside of our jurisdiction as Mr X has used his right of appeal to the SEND tribunal.
-
Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (24 005 511)
Statement Upheld Council tax 11-Aug-2024
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax payments as the matter has been remedied.
-
Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (24 004 573)
Statement Upheld Charging 21-Oct-2024
Summary: The Council acknowledges there was a missed opportunity to explain the funding basis for the late Mr X’s care home placement and has waived the fees for the period when Mr X was deemed to be a short stay resident. That remedies any injustice arising from that complaint. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council conducted the assessment of mental capacity.
-
Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (23 012 842)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Nov-2024
Summary: Miss X complained the Council delayed identifying a special school place for her child, Y, which led to them missing education. Miss X also complained the Council failed to provide Y with suitable school transport. We cannot investigate Miss X’s concerns about Y’s education because she had a right of appeal to the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) tribunal about Y’s school placement. We have ended this investigation about Y’s school transport. The Council has put in place service improvements, the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement and there is nothing worthwhile we can achieve by pursuing this matter further.
-
Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (24 007 782)
Statement Upheld Noise 16-Dec-2024
Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council handled his report of a statutory nuisance. We find the Council at fault for its poor communication. This left Mr X uncertain of the outcome of his report and unaware of the alternative options he could pursue. The Council has agreed to apologise and make improvements to its services.