LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement with Miss X’s family and the Council starting child protection court proceedings.

Summary: Ms A complained to the Council that it was not dealing with her child’s special educational needs appropriately. She brought the matter to the ombudsman because the Council did not respond to her complaint. We found the Council is at fault. The Council has agreed to make payments in recognition of the injustice caused and carry out service improvements to avoid a repeat of what has happened.

Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about how the Council handled Miss X’s housing case in 2023. There is not a good reason for the delay in Miss X bringing the complaint to us.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to provide support to her son when he could not attend school due to mental health needs causing distress and lost educational opportunities. Ms X also complained the Council issued an Education Health and Care Plan for her son and failed to include an Education Other than at School package it agreed. The Council’s offer is a suitable remedy to Ms X for missed provision and she has appealed to the SEND Tribunal, so we have ended our investigation into the complaint.

Summary: We cannot investigate some of Miss X’s complaint about the content of her child, Y’s, Education, Health and Care Plan because she appealed to a Tribunal. We will not investigate the remaining matters regarding delay and poor communication because the Council apologised, and the remaining injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council fining Mr X for his child’s unauthorised school absence. This is because Mr X had a right to go to a magistrate’s court to contest the fine it would have been reasonable to use.

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council’s commissioned care provider misled him about the fees for his mother’s care. The Council’s care provider has subsequently restored the original fee level. The Council has also agreed to offer Mr X a symbolic payment in recognition of the frustration he was caused, and the time and trouble caused by its actions.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her council tax account, particularly a visit to her home by its enforcement agent. Mrs X said the visit caused much distress. We found there was fault causing injustice. The action already taken by the Council, which included written apologies, correction of Mrs X’s council tax account and payment of £100 financial redress, suitably put matters right.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about a lack of educational support for her son. This is because the issue stems from the Council’s decision not to issue him an Education Health and Care Plan and the decision carried a right of appeal which it would have been reasonable for Miss X to use.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to award free school transport to the complainant’s daughter. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: We found fault in the Council’s failure to provide suitable education for the complainant’s son (Y) from the end of February until mid-June 2023, in its failure to ensure all Y’s special educational provision were delivered to him and in the way the Council dealt with the complainant’s (Ms X) complaint. We did not find fault in the Council’s personal budget process. The Council’s fault caused injustice to Y and Ms X. The Council agreed to apologise, make symbolic payments and review its complaint handling.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council decided to introduce wheeled bins and alternate weekly collections. He also complains the Council refused to meet him to discuss the matter. We cannot investigate matters which affect all or most people in a Council’s area. And we do not consider the Council to be at fault in refusing to meet the complainant.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed implementing actions it agreed after considering a complaint from Mr X under the statutory children’s complaints procedure. The Council has agreed to implement the actions within one month and apologise to Mr X for not doing so sooner.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about alleged lies by a social worker in a court report and verbally in court, or the evidence of Mr X’s child’s mother in court. An absolute legal bar prevents us investigating matters that have formed part of court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council failing to appropriately deal with her reports of anti-social behaviour from her neighbour, who is a council tenant. This is because the complaint is out of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction as it concerns the Council’s actions as a social housing landlord.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to properly consider a safeguarding referral she made. We did not find fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s breach of planning control in relation to material used for a neighbour’s extension.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to be able to question its decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council giving consent for a healthy tree to be felled. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

the Council’s Adult Social Care services involvement with his late mother, Ms Y. Part of the complaint is late, there is insufficient evidence of fault and we could not achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway repair and maintenance because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to approach the courts, who are better placed to consider the issue.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council has failed to properly communicate with her about her child’s education and provision in her Education, Health and Care Plans and it has failed to provide her with a suitable education. The Council is at fault and this caused injustice. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to provide an adequate remedy for the loss of education caused by delays in providing additional funding and avoidable distress.

Summary: Ms X complained about the way the Council conducted a Care Act assessment of her needs, and how it responded to her complaints about that matter. The Council was at fault as it delayed completing an assessment and providing appropriate support for Ms X and did not keep clear and accurate records. The Council will apologise to Ms X and pay her £3,000 to recognise the injustice caused to her by the faults and improve its services to avoid similar drift and delay in the future.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to reimburse costs associated with her daughter, Y’s, Education Other Than At School package. She complained the Council failed to provide any funding from September 2023 until December 2023. Mrs X also complained the Council did not follow the Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) annual review process. Mrs X said this distressed her and she has been left in financial difficulty. She said this impacted Y’s education. There was fault in the way the Council did not make the payments to Mrs X in a timely manner, did not pay her the full amount it sho

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council not sharing relevant information with care homes when sourcing a placement for her father. She says this led to care homes that were unsuitable offering him a place and forced the family to pay a top up fee to enable her father to attend the family’s preferred care home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.