LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about matters related to the Council’s data handling. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to take the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Summary: Mr X complained about Derbyshire County Council and NHS Derby and Derbyshire Integrated Care Board. We will not consider his complaint about the delay issuing his son’s Education, Health and Care Plan. That complaint is late. Also, we cannot consider Mr X’s complaint about not securing health provision to enable Y to attend school. That is bound up with matters which Mr X appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability), which places the complaint out of jurisdiction.

Summary: We have found fault with the Council for failing to meet the Education, Health and Care Plan statutory timescales. This caused Miss X’s daughter to miss out on special educational needs support and education. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy the missed education and support.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed reviewing her child, Y’s, Education, Health and Care Plan at a school transition point, and that the delay meant that Y missed out on a place at the family’s preferred school. We found fault causing injustice. The Council has apologised to Ms X but should agree to make a payment to her to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s replacement of speed limit signs, because any injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the contents of an assessment. This is because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council and because an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay in the annual review of an Education, Health and Care Plan. This is because the injustice from the delay is not significant enough to warrant an investigation. If Mrs X wants to challenge the content of her child’s Education, Health and Care Plan then it is reasonable for her to appeal to a tribunal.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the decision to refuse to carry out and Education Health and Care Needs Assessment, and about the Council’s response to subsequent correspondence. The complainant has used her right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) and this places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: Mr F complained about delay by the Council completing an education, health and care (EHC) needs assessment for his daughter, G. The Council upheld his complaint, apologised and offered a payment of £500 for the time, trouble and distress the delay caused. We have recommended a remedy for the impact on G’s education.

Summary: Ms C complains the Council failed to properly advise her of residential care charges. The Council has accepted fault and agreed to apologise and waive an outstanding charge.

Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about how the Care Provider and the Council handled allegations made against Mr Y and Miss X. There is not a good reason for the delay in the matter being brought to the Ombudsman.

Summary: Mrs X complained her son, W, did not receive free school meals because their school failed to make adjustments for their needs. We cannot investigate this complaint, because we cannot investigate the actions of the school.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council delayed carrying out a review of Mrs X’s child’s Education Health and Care Plan. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to a complaint about a footpath. This is because there is no indication of fault in the Council’s response.

Summary: Ms X complained about the significant delays in the education, health and care plan process. She also said the Council’s communication has been poor. We find the Council was at fault. This caused significant distress to Ms X and her son. To address this injustice caused by fault, we make several recommendations.

Summary: We found fault on Mrs D’s complaint about the Council’s delay processing her application for an Education, Health and Care plan for her son, E. It also delayed checking her concerns about the school failing to make the required provision for him. There were communication failures. This caused them distress as E lost provision. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Summary: We upheld Mr X’s complaints about delays in the Education, Health and Care needs assessment of his child and the Council’s poor communication. This is because the Council upheld Mr X’s complaints and provided a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council delayed reviewing a child’s Education Health and Care Plan and personal budget. This is because the Council has now completed the reviews and offered a suitable remedy for the delay so investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We have discontinued our investigation into Miss X’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with Y’s education. The Council has already investigated her complaint, accepted mistakes, and offered suitable remedies. As a result, there is nothing we can add.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education, Health and Care Plan process for the complainant’s child. The delay by the Council did not cause a personal injustice significant enough to warrant us investigating. Miss X has now appealed to a tribunal which places the recent decision outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: Ms X complains about Derbyshire County Council and Derbyshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust. She says the organisations acted with fault when she was detained in hospital under the Mental Health Act in 2022. Ms X’s complaint is late and there are not enough good reasons for the Ombudsmen to investigate it now.

Summary: Ms X complains about Derbyshire County Council and Derbyshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust. She says the organisations acted with fault when she was detained in hospital under the Mental Health Act in 2022. Ms X’s complaint is late and there are not enough good reasons for the Ombudsmen to investigate it now.

Summary: Mr F complained on behalf of his mother, Mrs J, that the Council failed to take action after she was discharged from hospital in May 2023. As a result she was left needing residential care. Mr F also complained that the Council’s financial assessment did not take all his mother’s costs into account. We found some fault by the Council in the way it dealt with matters but this did not cause injustice to Mrs J.

Summary: an investigation found fault in the Council’s May 2022 assessment of Mr F’s son B’s needs. The Council offered a symbolic payment of £500 and agreed to backdate an increase in support from September 2022. We consider this an appropriate remedy.

Summary: Mr F complained about the Council’s handling of a payment for expenses he incurred. The Council made the payment into an account used for direct payments. Mr F had difficulty withdrawing the money, and when he did the audit team questioned his spending. There was fault by the Council in its handling of a payment to Mr F, but the Council has offered a suitable remedy.