LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed reviewing his son, Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan, and failed to provide an appropriate education since it decided he needed a special school placement in summer 2023. Mr X also complained the Council did not provide the special educational provision specified in Y’s EHC Plan. The Council was at fault. It will make a payment to Mr X to recognise the loss of educational provision to Y and the distress caused to himself. The Council will also review how it ensures provision is in place for children with EHC Plans where there is no suitable

Summary: Mr X complains the Council removed his access to a direct payment account and wrongly invoiced him for contributions and did not apologise. Mr X says this caused him avoidable and unnecessary distress. We find the Council at fault which caused injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the actions of a Councillor. There is no significant injustice and, in any case, the Council have already considered Mr X’s complaint and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council delayed in resolving her complaint about an invoice. This is because an investigation would not lead to any further findings or outcomes.

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint the Council ignored her reports of coercive control. Part of the complaint is late and more recent matters have been considered by the Court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider his complaint whilst there are ongoing court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about quality of care in a care home and the Council’s investigation of the matter. The Council accepts there was fault in its actions and those of the Care Provider it commissioned. It has apologised, and both it and the Care Provider have made service improvements. It has now agreed to take early action to recognise the outstanding injustice caused to Mr X and his mother, Mrs Y. It is not therefore proportionate to investigate the matter further.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to backdate a payment for home to school transport. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or significant personal injustice.

Social worker 1 Y’s current social worker Social worker 2 Y’s previous social worker

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

Summary: We have upheld Mr X’s complaint on behalf of his son, Mr Y, about his adult social care support package. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by completing a review of Mr Y’s care and support plan.

Ms X complained about the actions of the District Council and County Council in undertaking adaptations to a property to meet the needs of her disabled child Y. As a result, Ms X says the adaptations were not appropriate and further works were required. This meant the family was living in an unsuitable property for longer than necessary, which caused the family significant distress and disruption and meant Y had to spend six weeks in respite away from the family. Since 2019, Worcestershire Children First has provided children’s services functions, as a wholly Council owned company, on behalf o

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X complaint the Council failed to give her sufficient information about top up fees for her mother’s residential care placement. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, the accepted fault has not caused any significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council removing her child from her care. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. We have no remit to investigate matters being determined in court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has refused to consider some complaints about a child’s special educational needs. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault with how the Council has dealt with his complaints and we also cannot investigate them for the same or similar reasons given by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint alleging a confidentiality breach of data and also a claim for damages. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. This is because it is reasonable to expect the complainant to go to court and the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider the alleged data breach.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to install different coloured lighting on a roadway near Mr X’s home. We are unlikely to find fault and the Council’s actions have not caused Mr X an injustice. In any case we could not achieve the outcome Mr X is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her son’s education health and care plan annual review. This is because Mrs X wishes to challenge the outcome and it would be reasonable for her to appeal to the SEND Tribunal. We will not separately investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in completing the process because it does not cause her such significant injustice that it warrants investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to investigate his complaint whilst there is an ongoing police investigation into related matters.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide a suitable education for her son between July 2023 and March 2024. We found there was a delay in reviewing Y’s Education Health and Care Plan and a failure to provide an education for Y while he was not attending school. We recommended an apology and payment to recognise the impact.

Summary: Mrs Y complains the Council failed to ensure her daughter, D, received suitable alternative provision when she was unable to attend school. In our view, the Council made provision available at a level which was appropriate for D. However, there was some delay in putting the agreed level of provision in place which caused injustice. The Council has agreed to implement the remedial actions listed at the end of this statement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay in the Council issuing a personal budget payment for Mr X’s child. This complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code. The Council has already apologised and explained what will do to improve. Further investigation by us could not achieve a different outcome.

Summary: The Council was at fault because it did not arrange alternative educational provision for a child who was not attending school. It has already offered an adequate remedy for this, with the exception that it should also have offered to reimburse the complainant for a report she obtained privately. The Council has now agreed to do this. We have not investigated a complaint about the Council’s decision not to issue an education, health and care plan, because it carried a right of appeal to tribunal.

Summary: Ms X complains that the Council failed to consider its duty to make alternative education provision for Mrs Y’s daughter when she was unable to attend school on a full time basis. The Council is at fault as it delayed in considering its duty to make alternative education provision, delayed in offering the provision and delayed in issuing a final Education, Health and Care plan for Z. As a result, Z missed approximately 11 weeks of education and the faults caused distress to Mrs Y. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice by apologising to Mrs Y and Z and making symbolic payments

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide suitable support for her child resulting in declining attendance followed by a stop in attendance. Mrs X complained the Council delayed production of her child’s Education, Health and Care Plan. Mrs X also complained the Council delayed providing alternative provision of education for her child and when it did provide this it was unsuitable for her child’s needs. We found fault with the Council for failing to provide suitable education for Mrs X’s child for most of the period 14 September 2023 to 4 March 2024. We also found fault with the