LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to carry out an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment. Mr X appealed this decision to a Tribunal and therefore the law says we cannot investigate. We will not investigate Mr X’s further complaint about subsequent delays in the assessment process after the tribunal ruling. This is because the Council has already provided a suitable remedy for Mr X’s injustice here.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council made a false accusation against her and then did not handle her complaint properly. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice he received for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Summary: X complained about the Council’s communication with them about their application for a site plot and questioned if it fairly followed its allocation scheme. We found the Council at fault for poor communication, poor record keeping and failure to demonstrate transparency with its allocation decisions. This caused significant frustration and uncertainty to X. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay a symbolic payment to recognise their injustice. It has agreed to review its allocation scheme and make changes to how it retains records when administering the scheme.

Summary: The Council failed to provide Speech and Language and Occupational Therapies along with specialist equipment for Mrs X’s child, Y. This should have been provided as it was set out in Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council has accepted fault, apologised and paid Mrs X a suitable financial remedy.

Summary: The Council was at fault for the delay in providing the occupational therapy provision outlined in Mrs X’s child Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan. It was also at fault for failing to properly consider its alternative provision duty when Y’s placement at their school broke down. The Council will apologise and make a symbolic payment to Mrs X to acknowledge the avoidable impact of its faults.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s consultation into changes to its post-16 transport policy. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Summary: There was fault by the Council. There were delays organising annual reviews and delay sending the final Education, Health and Care plan after the 2025 annual review. There was delay paying the personal budget but the Council remedied this when considering the complaint during it’s complaints procedure, along with making a payment to remedy its failure to provide the Occupational Therapy in the Education, Health and Care Plan. An additional payment for further failure to provide therapy in the Education, Health and Care plan, along with an apology and a review of procedures remedies th

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to secure the provision outlined in an Education, Health and Care Plan because the matter overlaps with a SEND Tribunal Appeal.

Summary: Miss X complained about the way the Council dealt with her son, Y’s education. The Council was at fault for delaying in issuing Y’s education, health and care plan, failing to provide provision from the education, health and care plan, delaying in considering and implementing a personal budget and poorly responding to her complaint. This caused Miss X and Y distress, frustration and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make payments, provide a timeframe for implementing provision and consider provision catch-up sessions for Y.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s disclosure of Mr X’s personal data or its failure to include him in an important meeting. This is because complaints about personal data are best dealt with by the Information Commissioner’s Office and the remaining issues are inextricably linked to ongoing proceedings taking place in court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to repair rising bollards at a junction near the complainant’s home. The Council has taken action which is a satisfactory way to address the complaint, and we are unlikely to achieve a more worthwhile outcome.

Summary: There was fault by the Council. The Council delayed issuing an EHC Plan after an annual review, an injustice which the Council remedied by a symbolic payment before the complaint came to the Ombudsman. The Council also failed ensure a child had transport to an alternative provision which was intended to be made by the provider. The Council failed to consider whether a child could manage more than the part time alternative educational provision made for three terms. A symbolic payment and reimbursing mileage costs remedies the injustice caused to the family.

Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to update Mr S’s care plan to include provision after his day placement ended in August 2024. This meant he missed out on provision to meet his eligible care needs. This also caused his mother, Ms X, distress, as she became his fulltime carer with no respite. The Council agreed to apologise and make payments to Mr S and Ms X to acknowledge the distress caused and the lack of provision. It also agreed to report back to us on steps it will take to prevent similar issues from happening in future.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide her child with the Occupational Therapy provision specified in their Education, Health and Care Plan. We find the Council at fault, causing a loss of provision. The Council has apologised and offered a suitable payment to Mrs X, which is a satisfactory remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to provide her child with suitable, alternative education when her child was out of school for two years. In recognition of the injustice caused, the Council has paid Ms X a symbolic financial remedy and there are already service improvements underway at this Council. We therefore decided to discontinue this investigation, as further investigation would not lead to a worthwhile or different outcome.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to put in place suitable alternative provision after her child stopped attending school. The Council failed to demonstrate that it kept its duty to arrange alternative education provision under review for a period of seven months. This caused Ms X avoidable frustration and uncertainty and to recognise this, the Council has agreed to apologise and pay Ms X £300. For the rest of the period Ms X complained of, the Council kept this duty under review as we would expect and was not at fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a safeguarding review by the Council concerning a case involving the murder of a child widely covered by national media . Mr X has not claimed any relationship to the child involved. The Council’s actions in respect of the child are not likely to have caused him any injustice that would warrant investigation by us.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s notification and decision-making processes when deciding to install a pedestrian crossing on the road on which he lives. There is not enough evidence of Council fault affecting the outcome of its decision to warrant us investigating. We also cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants from his complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s safeguarding enquiries relating to Mrs X’s daughter, Ms Y. We already investigated parts of the complaint. Some parts are late and there is not a good reason for Mrs X’s delay in bringing these matters to us. Complaints about the Council’s data-handling are best considered by the Information Commissioner. We could not achieve a meaningful outcome by investigating the remaining parts of the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an invoice the Council sent to the complainant to reclaim an overpayment of direct payments. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate now.

Summary: Mrs B complained about the Council’s failure to provide alternative education for her son D who was not attending school. We found fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs B and D and make a symbolic payment.

Summary: Mr A has complained about a lack of aftercare planning by a Council, Integrated Care Board and a Mental Health Trust for his daughter, Miss B. Mr A said this led to deterioration in her mental health. We found fault with these organisations who have agreed to carry out our recommendations to remedy the injustice to Mr A and his daughter.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged by a road defect which the Council had failed to repair. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to take the Council to court.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide the provision set out in her child’s Education Health and Care Plan. We found fault by the Council which caused Mrs X’s child to miss provision set out in their Plan. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X and make a payment to remedy the injustice caused.