LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaints. She has already appealed the decision to detain her under Section 3 of the Mental Health Act to the First Tier Tribunal (Mental Health). Also, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman is better placed to consider her complaints about transfer between hospitals and care and treatment under Section 3.

Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to involve her in her child’s care reviews or communicate with her about her child’s care and wellbeing. The matter has already been considered by a court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to allocate social housing to him because there is no evidence of fault. We will not investigate its failure to take a homelessness application in August or December 2023. This is because the Council has upheld the complaint and agreed to remedy the uncertainty caused by paying him £250, which is appropriate.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the standard of care provided to his mother by Company A, a Council-commissioned care provider. Company A has investigated Mr X’s concerns, upheld parts of the complaint and apologised. It is unlikely further investigation would lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s approval of a development near his home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the suitability of the emergency accommodation arranged for him. This is because it was arranged by the probation service, not the Council. We cannot investigate the actions of the probation service.

Summary: There was fault the Council did not fully consider Mr X’s request to reduce the information he needed to provide it while it was monitoring his direct payments. However, this fault is one which we would describe as a service failure. Any remaining injustice the Council’s actions caused Mr X by this service failure, has already been remedied by the Council’s actions, through its offer of moving him to a different payment scheme.

Summary: Mrs B complained about changes in her adult son’s care plan and financial assessment and said the Council failed to provide her with a carer’s assessment. There was fault in the failure to provide a carer’s assessment and the Council did not properly explain, at the time it reviewed the care plan, why it made the changes it did. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs B, to carry out a carer’s assessment and to pay a financial remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council preventing Mr X from bringing a wheeled object into a Council building. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions. In addition, Mr X has not sustained a significant injustice due to this matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions during the re-assessment of Miss X’s child’s special educational needs. This is because the matters complained of are not separable from the decision about the nature of the child’s needs and the educational setting needed to meet them. Miss X has used her right of appeal to a Tribunal regarding the content of the Education Health and Care Plan the Council issued and we cannot investigate how it arrived at that content without trespassing on matters subject to the Tribunal appeal. How the Council dealt with Miss X’s co

Summary: We have ended our investigation of Mr X and Mrs Y’s complaint about the actions of health visitors commissioned by the Council to provide a service to families. This is because we consider: we cannot achieve the outcome they want; we cannot add to the previous investigation by the service provider and its response already represents a reasonable outcome to some of the complaint issues; there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or enough evidence any fault caused Mr X and Mrs Y injustice: and the information commissioner is better placed than us to look at some of

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the complainant was escorted from the Council’s offices without good reason. This is because we could not add to the investigation already carried out by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about child protection action taken by the Council. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement with the complainant’s family and the living arrangements of their child. This is because we cannot consider complaints linked to court proceedings or achieve the outcome the complainant wants.

Summary: The complainants alleged that the Council failed to provide alternative full-time education when their daughter was unable to attend school because of her medical needs. We have found fault by the Council causing an injustice and recommended a way to remedy this. The Council has accepted this. We have therefore completed our investigation and are closing the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to pay interest on a council tax refund. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a school admissions appeal panel’s decision. We are unlikely to achieve a significant remedy as he has had a second successful appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a school admissions appeal panel’s decision. We are unlikely to achieve a significant remedy as he has had a second successful appeal.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not ensure her son, Y, received provision in his Education, Health and Care Plan. She also complained about poor communication and poor complaint handling. She says Y has missed out on provision as a result and she has been caused frustration and distress. The Council was at fault. There were gaps in speech and language therapy provision between October and November 2020 and September and November 2021. There was also poor communication. The Council will pay Mrs X £600 to be used for Y’s educational benefit in recognition of the lost provision, apologi

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained the Council left them without the social care support they needed. There was no fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged after hitting a pothole. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim at court.

Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to provide her daughter with a suitable education, and delayed identifying the need for an Education, Health and Care plan. Mrs X said her daughter has missed out on education, and it has had a significant impact on her, her daughter, and the wider family. We do not find the Council at fault.

Summary: Ms C complained about the way the Council responded after March 2019, to her request for a reassessment of her needs. She also complained about the lack of reasonable adjustments the Council has made for her.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the content of an assessment and the conduct of the social worker who carried it out. This is because we cannot achieve anything significant by doing so.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has not provided the required support to meet her adult son, Y’s, needs since March 2019 and is refusing to fund a live-in personal assistant. I have ended my investigation. Part of the complaint is out of time, there is insufficient evidence of fault and the Council has agreed to Mrs X’s request to use Y’s direct payment to employ the family member currently living at their address. Further investigation could achieve nothing more.