LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We have upheld Mr B’s complaint about delay responding to his complaint about his care and support arrangements. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused. The Council will investigate Mr B’s complaint within eight weeks, apologise to him and pay him £150 for the frustration and distress caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council’s Trading Standards Service did not investigate a property scam. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not manage the transition from children’s services to adult social care for her daughter, Ms G, failed to meet Ms G’s identified needs when she finished education, and failed to communicate with Mrs X about the matter properly. The Council was at fault when it made errors in deciding how Ms G’s care needs could be met, and in communicating those decisions to Mrs X. The Council will apologise and make symbolic payment to Ms G for the care she did not receive and to Mrs X for the avoidable distress and impact on her own health conditions caused by the Co

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about matters related to a report that the Council provided during court proceedings. This is because the law prevents us from investigating what happens in court.

Summary: Mrs X complained on behalf of her father, Mr Y about the way Lincolnshire County Council and United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust discharged him from hospital to a care home, The Old Rectory. The Hospital Trust acted with fault when it discharged Mr Y and should apologise to Mrs X for the uncertainty it caused her. It should also take action to avoid similar fault. Mrs X also complained about Lincolnshire Community Health Service NHS Trust’s support for Mr Y’s pressure sores. We found the Community Trust should have started care planning sooner than it did. While that did not cause

Summary: Mrs X complained on behalf of her father, Mr Y about the way Lincolnshire County Council and United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust discharged him from hospital to a care home, The Old Rectory. The Hospital Trust acted with fault when it discharged Mr Y and should apologise to Mrs X for the uncertainty it caused her. It should also take action to avoid similar fault. Mrs X also complained about Lincolnshire Community Health Service NHS Trust’s support for Mr Y’s pressure sores. We found the Community Trust should have started care planning sooner than it did. While that did not cause

Summary: Mrs X complained on behalf of her father, Mr Y about the way Lincolnshire County Council and United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust discharged him from hospital to a care home, The Old Rectory. The Hospital Trust acted with fault when it discharged Mr Y and should apologise to Mrs X for the uncertainty it caused her. It should also take action to avoid similar fault. Mrs X also complained about Lincolnshire Community Health Service NHS Trust’s support for Mr Y’s pressure sores. We found the Community Trust should have started care planning sooner than it did. While that did not cause

Summary: We will not investigate this historical complaint about the Council placing Mr Y in a children’s home in the 1970s. We could not carry out a sound, fair and meaningful investigation given the time that has passed.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the adequacy of the Council’s reports for court. The law says we cannot investigate anything that forms part of court proceedings including information and reports produced for the court. We would expect Mr X to raise any concerns about these issues in court.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s Child and Family Assessment report because it lies outside our jurisdiction. The law prevents us from investigating complaints about matters that have been considered in court proceedings. We have no discretion to do so.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council spending on a footpath as this impacts all or most of the people in the Council area and is not therefore within our legal remit.

Summary: We will not investigate this boundary dispute because it is a matter that needs to be resolved in court.

complains the Council have failed to use a collaborative approach to agree safe school transport terms for her son Y, as detailed in Section F of his Education, Health and Care Plan. She says the Council failed to complete the school transport travel plan properly. We do not find fault with the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care in a residential care home. This is because it is unlikely we would add to a safeguarding investigation already undertaken or achieve a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council shared confidential information with a venue. The complaint is best dealt with by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s involvement with his mother’s care. Other bodies are better placed to consider Mr X’s concerns about the Council’s corporate appointeeship for his mother. Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s interaction with him is late and there are no good reasons exercise discretion to accept this late complaint now.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council disclosed personal information about him. The Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to deal with complaints about data protection.

Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to safeguard her daughter Ms X or carry out a proper investigation of her circumstances, which has resulted in delayed distress for Ms X. The evidence shows that the Council acted properly in the light of Ms X’s capacity to make her own decisions about her future accommodation.

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s Care Act assessment, the amount and inconsistency of care she received, and how it communicated with her and shared her information. We found fault and a service failure by the Council which meant Ms X did not receive all the care and support she was entitled to and experienced distress. The Council will apologise and make payment to acknowledge the injustice this caused her.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about financial assessment for adult social care charges, and the Council’s decision about a deprivation of asset. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s decision-making process or reach a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to change a social worker. We could not achieve the outcome Miss X is seeking by investigation.

Mr X says a Council officer has disclosed his personal data to a third party. We will not investigate because this complaint does not meet the tests set out in our Assessment Code on which complaints we should investigate. It is reasonable for Mr X to complain to the Information Commissioner’s office.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about children services’ actions. We have upheld Mrs X’s complaint as the Council has now agreed to follow the Children Act statutory complaints’ procedure.

Summary: There is no evidence that the Council ignored Ms X’s correspondence although the volume of contacts was difficult to manage. The care plan was produced in a timely manner which took account of some previous complaints that care plans had been rushed. Ms X successfully appealed the number of hours allocated.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a social worker’s assessment of her family. This formed part of ongoing court proceedings and we are legally prevented from investigating it.