Decision search
Your search has 49647 results
-
London Borough of Bromley (24 004 521)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 20-Feb-2025
Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide a full-time suitable education for her son including the provision set out in his Education, Health and Care Plan. She also complained the Council failed to issue the final amended EHC Plan within the statutory timescales. The Council delayed in finalising the EHC Plan and has failed to evidence that it properly considered whether the education provided amounted to a full-time suitable education. The agreed remedy includes a payment for the lost educational provision.
-
London Borough of Haringey (24 005 438)
Statement Upheld Allocations 20-Feb-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not complete a review of its decision on his housing allocations banding, which he requested in August 2023. The Council was at fault. It will complete the review and tell Mr X of the outcome, and pay him £300 to recognise the frustration and uncertainty he has been caused by the 15-month delay.
-
Statement Upheld Other 20-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the support the Council provided to her children. The Council has upheld her complaint and provided a suitable remedy. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
-
Suffolk County Council (24 006 127)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 20-Feb-2025
Summary: There was fault by the Council. The Council delayed issuing a final Education, Health and Care Plan after two annual reviews. An apology and symbolic payment remedies the injustice to the family, who had no right of appeal during the period of delay and will never know if changes to the provision in the plan might have been made.
-
Surrey Heath Borough Council (24 006 878)
Statement Upheld Allocations 20-Feb-2025
Summary: There was fault by the Council, because it did not properly explain its decision to keep the complainant in the lowest priority band of the housing register, despite it appearing he should qualify for a higher band. There is no evidence this had any substantive impact on the complainant’s position, but caused some frustration, for which the Council has agreed to apologise. There is no evidence of fault in the other aspects of this complaint, which concern general delays in rehousing the complainant, officer professionalism and the Council’s level of contact with him.
-
London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (24 007 107)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 20-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to take appropriate action when he informed it he was homeless. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 008 625)
Statement Not upheld Other 20-Feb-2025
Summary: There is no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it conducted assessments of Mr Y care and accommodation needs, and his capacity to decide about contact with Mr X.
-
Lancashire County Council (24 009 282)
Statement Upheld Other 20-Feb-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council stopped communicating with him in relation to his late aunt, Ms Y, without explaining its reasons why. The Council was at fault. It did not write to Mr X and tell him it would communicate with him via email. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X for the frustration and uncertainty it caused him.
-
Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (24 000 621)
Report Upheld Special educational needs 19-Feb-2025
Summary: Mrs A complained the Council failed to complete reviews of her children’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans within the statutory timescales. Mrs A says this has resulted in her children not receiving up-to-date provision to meet their educational and social care needs. Mrs A also complained the Council failed to complete EHC Plan reviews in the statutory timescales for over a thousand other children.
-
Central Bedfordshire Council (23 012 830)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 19-Feb-2025
Summary: Ms X complains that the Council failed to deliver the provision outlined in Section F of her son Y’s EHC Plan, resulting in delays and unmet needs, including issues with Y’s personal budget. We have concluded our investigation having made a finding of fault. The Council acknowledges that it did not deliver the provision, caused delays, and failed to communicate effectively. It has provided a remedy to address the distress and inconvenience caused. We are satisfied that this remedy sufficiently addresses the injustice identified in this complaint. The Council has agreed to our recommendations.