LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mrs X complained about the way the Council deal with a review of her daughter’s care and how it responded to her complaint about the matter. She also complained the Council failed to provide respite support and paid Direct Payments at the wrong rate for a number of years. We found there was fault by the Council. This was compounded by failings in the way it responded to Mrs X. The Council took some action to address the impact. We recommended the Council provided a written apology, made a distress payment and reimbursed her solicitors fees.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged due to the Council’s failure to maintain a road. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his claim against the Council at court.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed issuing an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for her grandson (C), which means he does not have a place at a Special School. Ms X also said the Councils complaint response has been poor. The Council is at fault for delay in assessing C’s needs and issuing an EHC Plan. This has caused the family uncertainty.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of an early annual review of their child’s (Y’s) Education, Health, and Care Plan. We find

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care in a residential care home. The complainant alleges neglect, which would be more appropriately investigated by the relevant safeguarding authority or by a court. The person using the service has died so we can achieve no personal remedy for any fault. The Care Quality Commission has inspected and made service improvements. It is unlikely an Ombudsman investigation would achieve anything further.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions relating to a young person with special educational needs. This is because the complaint is made on behalf of a public body. It is therefore outside our jurisdiction with no discretion to investigate.

Summary: There is fault by the Council. It took too long to do a financial assessment. It cannot show that it made sure Mrs D understood that her mother-in-law would have to contribute to the care home charges, as well as the family pay a third party top up. It is likely that this impacted on the choice of home and led to distress when the Council sent an unexpected bill.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s assessment of his finances and Disability Related Expenditure. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed considering a complaint at stage three of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council has now agreed to resolve the complaint by offering to make a payment to the complainant to remedy the time and trouble they have been to.

Summary: There was delay in completing an EHC needs assessment and a failure to ensure Ms X’s child was able to access suitable fulltime education on the same basis as their non-disabled peers. This caused distress and loss of education. There was also a failure to consider social care needs. The Council will apologise, make a symbolic payment and service improvements. The complaint is upheld.

Summary: The Council has implemented its own Blue Badge policy since the time of Ms A’s application. It agrees to reassess her application based on information from her medical professionals in the light of the relevant criteria.

Summary: Miss C complained about the Council failing to explain the costs of her father-in-law Mr X’s care package, failing to reduce the care package when Mr X requested and discharging him from hospital with no care package. This caused Mr X stress and care cost he could not afford. We find fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address this injustice.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to properly consider her application for travel assistance for her son, C. Mrs X says that without the travel assistance, C is unable to receive the bespoke educational package in his Education, Health and Care Plan. There is fault in how the Council considered the application and the Council has agreed to reconsider the application and make a payment to remedy the injustice caused to Mrs X and C.

Summary: The Council delayed carrying out an assessment of Mr B’s social care needs and then failed to stay in contact with Mr B after it decided he no longer needed residential care and he could return to his home with a package of care. The Council then failed to consider how his needs could continue to be met when the move did not go ahead. It also failed to respond to correspondence sent on behalf of Mr B which raised concerns about the process. Mr B has since passed away and so it is no longer possible to remedy his injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr B

Summary: Mrs Y complains about the Council not providing any alternative education when her daughter was not well enough to attend school. The Ombudsman’s provisional view is we cannot investigate most of the period when Mrs Y’s daughter was out of school. This is because Mrs Y had appealed a decision that was linked to the matter under compliant. We find no fault for the period we can consider.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a safeguarding failure by the Council. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation. We cannot investigate the actions of the school in this case.

Summary: The Council failed to apply the correct legal test when deciding an application for free home to school transport for a child with an Education, Health and Care Plan. The complainant says this has had an adverse financial impact and caused his son anxiety. The Council will review its decision, consider if financial redress is due, apologise and provide a time and trouble payment. The Council will also review whether other families have been similarly affected.

Summary: Ms C complains about the actions of a social worker and the Council support after her discharge from hospital. Ms C says she suffered unnecessary time, costs and upset during an already difficult time. We have found fault by the Council in how it responded to Ms C’s contact about a meals service and her subsequent complaint but consider the agreed actions of an apology, £200 and service improvements provide a suitable remedy.

Summary: Mr R complained that the Council had wrongly charged his mother, Mrs C, for her residential social care after assuring him she would not have to pay. He also complained that the invoice was not sent to him until six months after Mrs C’s death. The Council was not at fault for charging Mrs C for her adult social care. The Council has accepted it was at fault for a failure to send an invoice for six months after Mrs C died. This fault caused Mr R injustice as he was surprised to receive it. The Council has agreed to pay Mr R a sum in recognition of the injustice caused.

Summary: Miss X complained about delays relating to the Council’s handling of the Education, Health, and Care Plan annual review process for her son. There is fault by the Council for significant delay in issuing a draft and final Plan following its decision to amend and also in the handling of her complaint. This caused a direct loss of provision to her son, delayed Miss X’s right to appeal, in addition to her time and trouble in chasing the Council for this. The Council has agreed to provide Miss X with an apology, a financial payment and to make service improvements to remedy the injustice

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Council providing alternative provision for Ms X’s son when he could not attend school. 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 her son, Y, was not provided with an education from March 2021 until February 2022. Mrs X also complained the Council did not adhere to the statutory timescales to amend Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) and her complaints have not been responded to within appropriate timescales. This has caused Mrs X distress. The Council was at fault for not amending the EHCP within timescales and did not ensure Y received an appropriate education or provision. There have been delays throughout this case and Mrs X has been put to time and trouble to complain. The Council ha

Summary: A disabled woman complained that the Council gave flawed advice which led to her father incurring wasted costs on plans for an extension which could not be implemented. But we will not investigate this matter because the complaint has been made late.

Summary: Miss C complains the Council failed to properly consider her application for a Blue Badge which means she struggles with day to day activities outside the home. We have found fault by the Council in the way it explained its decision to Miss C. However, we consider the agreed action of ensuring a more detailed explanation of any decision with the Council’s agreement to accept a new application provides a suitable remedy.

Summary: Mrs X complained on behalf of her daughter, Miss Y, about the Council’s decisions regarding the use of direct payments and an unpaid invoice for Miss Y’s assessed contribution. Mrs X says the Council has overcharged Miss Y and caused avoidable stress. We have discontinued our investigation because the complaint is late.