Decision search
Your search has 49458 results
-
London Borough of Hackney (24 003 887)
Report Upheld Transport 03-Apr-2025
Summary: Mrs D complained the Council refused to renew her Blue Badge. Our investigation has found fault in the advice given to staff who work at the Council’s assessment centre and assess Blue Badge applications.
-
Moors Park (Bishopsteignton) Limited (23 001 565)
Report Upheld Charging 18-Mar-2025
Summary: The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman investigated a complaint about care home fees charged to the complainant’s mother. We found Moors Park (Bishopsteignton) Limited: imposed additional charges for care provided over a weekly baseline limit of 25 hours, which was not set out in the contract; charged other residents additional fees without first amending their contracts; This meant the care home caused the woman financial injustice and her son suffered time and trouble complaining.
-
West Sussex County Council (24 014 393)
Statement Upheld Charging 25-Feb-2025
Summary: We have upheld Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to charge her late mother for care. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.
-
Kingsley Healthcare (Birmingham) Limited (24 014 535)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 25-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a care provider allegedly failing to meet the complainant’s mother’s care needs while in residential care. The complainant says her mother was neglected and that her weight declined significantly leading to her being admitted to hospital where she later died. There is insufficient evidence of any of the care provider’s action falling short of the CQC’s Fundamental Standards for care, or Mrs Z being caused an injustice.
-
Royal Borough of Greenwich (24 015 379)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 25-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s communications with Ms X in relation to a planning application for a development site close to her home. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.
-
London Borough of Haringey (24 015 583)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 25-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about two periods of time in Ms X’s previous property when she had no heating or hot water. This is because the first period between November 2022 and April 2023 falls outside our jurisdiction due to the passage of time and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council in relation to the more recent period between October and December 2023.
-
London Borough of Camden (24 015 737)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 25-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action regarding breaches to a house in multiple occupation licence as there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 015 748)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Assessment and care plan 25-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council and the Care Provider it commissioned when Mr Y returned home from hospital with a package of care. We could not achieve a meaningful outcome by investigating the matter further.
-
Southend-on-Sea City Council (23 004 755)
Report Upheld Disabled children 25-Feb-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained that an assessment of her son’s needs inappropriately depicted her wishes and feelings as negative and social workers did not communicate or engage with her appropriately. Mrs X also complained that the Council failed to carry out a proper parent carer’s needs assessment. We found there was no failure to engage and communicate with Mrs X and the statements made in the assessment amounted to professional judgements which we would not criticise. However, we found there was a failure to carry out a proper parent carer’s needs assessment. This was fault. The fault was significant and justified a public report because this was repeated fault which was not put right after a previous investigation we conducted found the same fault and recommended action to put it right. We also found that the Council failed to use the correct complaint process and its response to the complaint was significantly delayed. The failings in the assessment process and complaint handling meant a significant delay in assessing Mrs X to establish what support she may need and the matter has led to frustration and distress.
-
London Borough of Harrow (24 016 014)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Councillor conduct and standards 25-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Councillor’s conduct during a planning committee meeting. That is because the complaint is late.