LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to refer Mrs B for Continuing Health Care (CHC) funding. This is because there Is not enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the school named in an Education Health and Care Plan. This is because the complainant has appealed to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal. The complaint is therefore outside our jurisdiction

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about financial arrangements for children looked after by the Council. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to advise he or his stepmother about care charges before his stepmother passed away. Mr X complained the Council only provided first notice of the balance owed a year after his stepmother passed away. The Ombudsman found fault with the Council for a lack of transparency in billing for respite care and overcharging for residential care. The Council agreed to the Ombudsman’s recommendation to reduce the residential care fees by £232.00 to reflect the overcharge and apply a further reduction of £100, with an apology, to reflect the inconvenience and dis

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s planning department. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant our involvement.

Summary: Mrs G complains the Council did not take her grandchildren into care when they came to live with her in December 2020. The Council says it was a private family arrangement. There does not appear to be any fault in the Council’s decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s children’s services involvement in the complainants family. This is because most of the complaint is about matters that have been subject to court proceedings, which places it outside of our jurisdiction. Complaints about inaccurate information and the Council’s refusal to amend records are best dealt with by the Information Commissioner. There is no evidence of fault with how the Council has responded to other issues raised by the complainant.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council unfairly charged backdated care contributions for her son’s care. We consider there is no fault regarding the backdated charge. However, there is evidence of fault in the Council’s communications, and we recommended a remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council refusal to require his neighbour to plant replacement trees further away from his property. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault and Mr X’s injustice is the result of his neighbour’s actions rather than those of the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with a complaint about the conduct of a councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to involve her in a safeguarding enquiry where she was the alleged perpetrator. I ended this investigation because the Council has not had the opportunity to investigate and respond to Mrs X’s complaint and it is best placed to do so.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about alleged damage by the Council to the complainant’s parents’ grave memorial. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation. It would also be reasonable for the complainant to take the matter to court.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms P’s complaints about her mother’s care and treatment as it would be reasonable for her to use an alternative legal remedy. Further, we will not investigate her concerns about the Council’s handling of her complaint as there is insufficient injustice arising from complaint handling alone to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s alleged decision not to respond to the complainant. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. We have not seen enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to complete a reassessment of Mr X’s special educational needs. That is because Mr X currently has an appeal with the Tribunal about the provision specified in his Education Health and Care plan which places the matter outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with a complaint about the conduct of a councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about inconsistent information regarding a fall to Mr X’s Mother in March 2020. This is because we cannot add to the Council’s response or make a finding of the kind Mr X wants.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council is overcharging Mrs Y for the care she receives from its care provider, Icare Solutions (Wirral) Ltd. Mrs Y’s commissioned calls do not appear to have reflected her actual needs. This has resulted in significant overcharging, made worse by other failings within the charging system. The Council needs to correct these problems, apologise, recalculate Mrs Y’s charges and pay financial redress.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council discriminated against the complainant and will only let him pay his council tax by direct debit. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about the Council’s decisions relating to Ms Y’s accommodation and how this would be funded. There is not a good reason Ms X did not complain sooner.

Summary: We consider Boots UK Limited contributed to delays getting end of life medication to Mrs C before she died. Mr B suffered avoidable distress witnessing his mother in pain before she died. Boots should pay Mr B financial redress to recognise his injustice.

Summary: Mrs C complained about the way in which the Council supported her mother. We found fault with the way an assessment was carried out, which however did not result in an injustice to Mrs C or her mother.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to allow the complainants’ neighbour to put in a retrospective planning application. We have not seen evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a building control matter. This is because it is unlikely we could achieve the outcome the complainant wants.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about child protection action. This is because we cannot achieve what the complainant wants.