Decision search
Your search has 46984 results
-
MOP Healthcare Limited (22 001 140)
Report Upheld Residential care 11-Apr-2024
Summary: The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman investigated a complaint about residential services provided to the late Mr X. We found MOP Healthcare Limited: did not properly assess Mr X’s mental capacity after he attempted suicide; failed to process a Deprivation of Liberty safeguard application appropriately; took overly restrictive steps to deprive Mr X of his liberty by continuing 1-1 care despite his social worker and a Community Psychiatric Nurse advising less restrictive measures could be used to maintain his safety; charged Mr X an additional £2,520 a week for the 1-1 care. This meant Mr X was under constant supervision for the last 9 months of his life in Barrowhill Hall Care Home, even when on end-of-life care, due to a flawed capacity assessment. The complainant suffered significant distress and financial loss. The faults could also risk similar restrictions happening to other people.
-
Suffolk County Council (23 005 778)
Report Upheld Special educational needs 04-Apr-2024
Summary: Miss X also complained the Council has refused to provide an Education Other Than At School (EOTAS) package for her daughter and is wrongly trying to force her into a school setting. Her daughter has been unable to access education in a school setting for several years and has not received a suitable education.
-
Report Upheld Charging 18-Mar-2024
Summary: The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman investigated a complaint about charging for residential care.
-
Nottinghamshire County Council (23 016 689)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 12-Mar-2024
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about criminal and negligent acts by the Council and its approach to safeguarding. This is because we are not the appropriate body to consider matters relating to criminal acts or acts of negligence. Further, part of the complaint is late and we are unlikely to find fault in relation to safeguarding.
-
West Sussex County Council (23 016 582)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 12-Mar-2024
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care Plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the delay.
-
Westminster City Council (23 016 447)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Assessment and care plan 12-Mar-2024
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s care and support needs. He says the Council failed to complete a proper assessment for him as the Council ignored his need for ongoing rehabilitation and physiotherapy. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, there is another body better placed to consider the complaint.
-
London Borough of Croydon (23 018 145)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 12-Mar-2024
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then the London Tribunals.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 12-Mar-2024
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to consider his complaint about a social worker whilst there are ongoing court proceedings. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision.
-
London Borough of Sutton (23 018 320)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 12-Mar-2024
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider her complaint whilst there are ongoing court proceedings.
-
New Forest National Park Authority (23 018 540)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 12-Mar-2024
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s validation of his planning application. This is because the Council’s actions did not cause Mr X significant enough injustice to warrant investigation.