LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council placed Mr X in a care home a long distance from their home and it was difficult for her to visit. She also complained that when Mr X was moved to a closer home, his needs were not reviewed and problems with his catheter care continued. There is no evidence of fault on the part of the Council. The first placement was the only available option, and Mr X’s catheter care was managed appropriately.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council placed contact restrictions on his visits to his late partner, Mrs Y, who was living in a Council commissioned care home. The Council was at fault for not clearly explaining they were recommendations and the reasons for them. It has agreed to apologise to Mr X for the distress and frustration this caused and to review its procedures to prevent a recurrence of the fault. Mr X also complained the care home did not tell him his partner was put on end of life care when she was admitted to the care home. There was no fault as Mrs Y was not on end of life care wh

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that she suffered personal injury because she said the Council failed to grit a public path. This is because Miss X could submit a claim against the Council’s insurers and, if the claim is rejected, ultimately take the matter to court.

Summary: Ms Y complained about the time the Council took to assess her child and issue an Education, Health and Care plan. She also complained about the Council’s communication with her during the process. We found the Council at fault. It has agreed to make a recognition payment to Ms Y and to her child for the resulting injustice.

Summary: Mr B complained the Council delayed in issuing a final Education, Health and Care Plan following an annual review and failed to communicate throughout the process. We have found the Council at fault for a delay in issuing the final amended Education, Health and Care Plan and for its poor communication. These faults caused distress, frustration and uncertainty to Mr B. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment and complete service improvements to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to issue the complainant’s charity with an organisational blue badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mrs B complains that, after a Tribunal consent order, the Council did not upload the new Education, Health and Care Plan to its Hub. This meant her daughter’s school was following the old plan so she missed 15 months of the increased provision. We uphold the complaint due to Mrs B’s daughter’s missed provision. The Council has agreed to our recommendations.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to grant school transport assistance for the complainant’s daughter. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

Summary: Mrs C complained the Council did not follow statutory timeframes for completing an annual review and it communicated poorly throughout the process. We have found the Council at fault for failing to issue a final Education, Health and Care Plan following an annual review. To remedy the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs C and make a symbolic payment of £300.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her father’s care prior to August 2022. This is because a significant amount of time has passed since Staffordshire County Council was responsible for Mr Y’s care, which impacts on our ability to consider this now. There is another Ombudsman service that will be better placed to look at the remainder of the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her father’s care prior to August 2022. This is because a significant amount of time has passed since Staffordshire County Council was responsible for Mr Y’s care, which impacts on our ability to consider this now. There is another Ombudsman service that will be better placed to look at the remainder of the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the conduct of individual Council employees in late 2022. This is because Miss X’s complaint is late and does not cause significant injustice to warrant us investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not cutting back its tree in front of his property. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to justify an investigation.

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s actions in its child protection involvement with her family. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is about matters that have been subject to court proceedings. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about historic matters. This lies outside our jurisdiction because it is late and there are no good grounds to exercise discretion to consider it now.

Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint, about the way the Council considered the educational placement for a child with an education, health and care plan. This is because the matter was subject to an ongoing appeal at the time, and therefore falls outside of our jurisdiction.

Ms X complains about the Council’s waste and recycling centre failing to provide enough space to safely unload two mattresses. Ms X says the Council is liable for the scratches caused to someone else’s car as the mattresses unfolded to full size after unloading. We will not investigate as the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. It is reasonable for Ms X to take her claim to court.

Summary: Mr D says the Council failed to tell him it was pursuing a penalty charge notice. We have not found evidence of fault by the Council. We have completed the investigation and not uphold the complaint.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to deliver the provision in her son’s Education, Health and Care Plan and failed to respond to her complaint about this. She also complains the annual review of the EHC Plan was delayed and that all this caused distress and uncertainty. The Council did not provide all the Occupational Therapy and Speech and Language Therapy which is fault. It also delayed completing by the annual review. A suitable remedy is agreed.

Summary: We cannot investigate some of Miss X’s complaint about the Education, Health and Care process regarding her child because she appealed to a Tribunal. We will not investigate some of Miss X’s complaint because she had a right to appeal to a Tribunal. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable through an investigation into the remaining issues.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council delayed completing her child Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment and failed to ensure she received appropriate provision in the meantime. The Council was at fault for delay in issuing Y’s EHC Plan and for failing to consider whether it had a duty to arrange alternative provision for Y. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and make payments to acknowledge the distress, frustration and uncertainty this caused.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to deliver her daughter’s Education, Health and Care Plan in line with statutory timescales. We find fault with the Council for delay and have agreed a payment for the distress and frustration caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to tell him about a debt earlier. This is because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s delays and errors in calculating Mrs Y’s contribution towards her care home charges and in sending an invoice. We find the Council’s significant delays and the errors in the financial assessments are fault. These faults have caused Mrs X an injustice.

Summary: We have completed our investigation. The Council was at fault. It did not provide Miss X’s child, B, with education, while out of school. It did not properly assess B’s welfare during this time and failed to review B’s Education, Health, and Care (EHC) Plan in a timely manner. It should apologise to Miss X, award a symbolic payment to her, and carry out a review of internal policy.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s complaint handling. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate.