LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mr X complains on behalf of his son, Y, the Council failed to obtain advice and information from an Educational Psychologist within the statutory timescales as part of the Education Health and Care needs assessment. Mr X says this has caused his son and family distress. We have found fault in the actions of the Council for not completing the Education Health and Care needs assessment or issuing Y’s Plan within the required statutory timescales. The Council has agreed to issue an apology and financial payment.

Summary: Mrs X complained about contact restrictions between her relative Ms Y and Ms Y’s mother Mrs Z which the Council continued to impose after Ms Y left a care home. The Council was at fault for failing to clarify the nature of the restrictions and the actions needed to remove them. This caused Mrs X and Mrs Z frustration and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise and take action to prevent recurrence of the fault.

Summary: Mrs Y complains about delays in the Council’s assessments of her mother, Mrs Z, once she moved into a care home in 2022. In our view, there was delay in the allocation of a social worker and the subsequent care and support needs assessment. There was also some delay in completing the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard authorisation. The Council has already waived some of the care home fees. It will also apologise to Mrs Y in recognition of her time and trouble.

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council calculated what his son, Mr Y, should pay towards his care. The Council was at fault. This meant Mr Y paid more for his care than he should have for over a year. The fault also caused Mr X and Mr Y’s mother, Mrs X, avoidable frustration. The Council will apologise to Mr and Mrs X, reimburse Mr Y the money he should not have paid towards his care and issue a staff reminder.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council gave money to a ‘terrorist’ organisation.

Summary: Mrs A complains about the section 117 aftercare being provided to her sister, Ms B. We should not investigate this complaint because the Trust has already admitted fault and taken steps to remedy the injustice to Ms B. Further investigation would not achieve anything more.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to deal properly with the charges for his late mother’s care. There was a long delay in completing his mother’s financial assessment. The Council apologised for not going ahead with the financial assessment in September 2021, but has not apologised in writing for the delay in rearranging it. The Council’s communications with Mr X about the charges for his mother’s care lacked clarity, which caused confusion. The Council needs to apologise to Mr X these failings. However, the Council has not charged as much as it could have done for his mother’s care,

Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council did not deliver alternative provision for her son, Y who was unable to attend school. We have found no fault with how the Council handled Y’s attendance problems and education provision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care in a residential care home. This is because the Care Provider has accepted failings in service, apologised, and said the action it will take to improve service. It is unlikely an Ombudsman investigation would add to that investigation or lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council ending child in need plans for Mr X’s children. The Council no longer has safeguarding concerns about the children, and it would be reasonable for Mr X to use his right return to court to resolve issues of contact with his children.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council ending child in need plans for Mr X’s children. The Council no longer has safeguarding concerns about the children, and it would be reasonable for Mr X to use his right return to court to resolve issues of contact with his children.

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.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X complaint about the Council’s failure to provide alternative education.

Summary: The Council failed to complete an Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment within statutory timescales. This delay was, in part, due to a shortage of Educational Psychologists. The Council will make a symbolic payment to Mrs Y and D. The Council will also outline the service improvements it is taking to address the shortage of staff and backlog of cases.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a delayed child in need assessment and an officer’s comment. It is unlikely our investigation would reach a different outcome to the Council’s.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that a school has failed to implement appropriate support for a child to attend. This is because we are unable to investigate the internal management of schools.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to liaise with Ms B’s care provider about her supported living arrangements. This is because it is unlikely we would find enough evidence of fault with the Council’s actions to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education Health and Care Plan process for the complainant’s son. This is because if we were to investigate it is unlikely we would achieve a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about Children Services’ actions. The Council has agreed to follow the Children Act statutory complaints’ procedure. It will also provide a financial remedy for the delay in accepting the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about delays in her child’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) annual review process and her disagreement with the content of her child’s EHC Plan. This is because she has a right of appeal to a tribunal about the content of the plan. The Council has apologised for the delays in the annual review process. If Ms X considers the delays mean her child has missed out on provisions, the tribunal can consider this as part of an appeal.

Summary: Mrs X complained her mother, Mrs T, did not receive proper care at a care home run by

Summary: Mrs B complained on behalf of her son, Mr C, about poor communications by the Council. These were when Mr C’s supported living placement ended and then around his personal budget on moving to another placement. We upheld the complaint, finding some fault by the Council in respect of its communications on both matters. This caused injustice to Mrs B and Mr C as distress, with unnecessary uncertainty and frustration. The Council offered to remedy this injustice in a way that we considered would provide for a fair outcome to the complaint, with details set out at the end of this statemen

Summary: Mrs Y complains on behalf of her daughter, Miss X, that the Council did not fully secure the provision detailed in Section F of Miss X’s Education, Health and Care Plan. We have found the Council at fault for not securing the provision specified in Section F of the plan. The faults identified in this statement have caused Miss X an injustice. We have made recommendations to remedy this injustice.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed finalising amendments to her child, W’s, Education, Health and Care plan and failed to ensure W received all the provision in their plan. The Council was at fault for unnecessary delay in issuing the EHC plan. It will apologise to Mrs X and pay her £200. The Council will also send the Ombudsman an action plan setting out how it will adapt to cope with the increased demand on its Special Educational Needs service.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a discrepancy in funding for Mrs X’s late mother’s care. This is because the alleged fault would not have caused any injustice to Mrs X or her late mother.