PSOW Individual Decisions

Miss A complained that Ceredigion County Council had failed to respond to her request for her concerns to be considered as a formal complaint. The Ombudsman found that the Council had overlooked Miss A’s request for the matter to be considered as a formal complaint. The Ombudsman said this caused uncertainty for Miss A and decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to, within 3 weeks, offer an apology and explanation for the oversight and issue its complaint response

Mrs X complained about Ceredigion County Council’s delays from November 2023, including after the Education Tribunal Wales (ETW) hearing in December 2024, in implementing her daughter’s Education Other Than At School (EOTAS) package and Individual Development Plan (IDP) and the impact that this had on her and Mrs X’s family. Mrs X was also unhappy with the Council’s communication from November 2023, and queried whether it had been timely and appropriate at all times. After the Ombudsman started its investigation, the Council accepted that matters could have been handled better and progressed quicker. In response to this, the Council suggested a settlement to resolve Mrs X’s complaint. The Council said it would undertake the following: • Arrange a meeting to discuss Mrs X’s concerns, experiences and consider reimbursement costs of a mentoring scheme • Offer Mrs X and her family an unreserved apology and a goodwill financial gesture of £500 for time and trouble • Create an action plan to highlight lessons learned and keep Mrs X up to date with progress. The Ombudsman was satisfied that the actions agreed were proportionate and would deliver an appropriate outcome for Mrs X. On this basis, the complaint was subsequently closed.

Ms X, on behalf of Mr Y, complained that Ceredigion Council failed to respond to the full issues raised in her complaint and that it failed to respond to her follow up correspondence. The Ombudsman found there was a significant delay with the Council responding to Ms X. This caused additional frustration and uncertainty for Mr Y. She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to write to Ms X, within 2 weeks, to apologise for the delay and explain what went wrong. It also agreed to respond to the correspondence.

Mr A complained that Ceredigion County Council did not respond fully to his formal complaint in relation to the determination of a planning application. The Ombudsman found the Council had responded to Mr A’s initial complaint, but not acknowledge or respond to a follow up letter from Mr A in December 2023. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to provide a response to the letter Mr A sent to it in December 2023, and to issue an apology to Mr A for not acknowledging or responding. The Council agreed to complete these actions within 4 weeks.

Mrs A complained about the Council’s Stage 2 investigation including the rejection of her complaints by the Stage 2 Independent Investigation Officer (“IIO”) without the Council having provided evidence. The Ombudsman was critical of the shortcomings identified in the Stage 2 investigation given the resulting loss of trust and confidence that this had caused Mrs A. As part of an early resolution, the Council agreed to offer Mrs A and her husband a fulsome written apology for the shortcomings in the Stage 2 investigation and communications with her. It will also share the concerns about the Stage 2 investigation with the IIO and the Independent Person (who signed off the findings) as part of wider learning. The Council also agreed to remind its staff of the importance of documenting decisions and following this up in writing with the service user.

Mr C complained that Ceredigion County Council had refused to agree adaptations that would enable him to continue living independently in his home. He further complained that the Council had failed to take action to support his wellbeing when he was no longer able to leave his home or access his bathroom. The Ombudsman decided that although Mr C had contacted the Council on numerous occasions, his concerns had not been considered under the Council’s complaints procedure. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to investigate Mr C’s complaints and provide a response within 4 weeks.

Mrs A complained about how Ceredigion County Council presented debts she owed to it, in both a breakdown it issued and during the Council’s complaint procedure. The Ombudsman found that there were discrepancies in the figures presented by the Council and highlighted these to the Council. The Ombudsman found that this caused frustration and inconvenience to Mrs A and decided to settle the case without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to, within 1 month: 1. Apologise to Mrs A for the inaccuracies contained within the breakdown of what she owes the Council. 2. Reissue the breakdown dated 20 September 2024, correcting the inaccuracies within it.

Mr A complained that Ceredigion County Council (“the Council”) had disadvantaged him when it took the ladder leading to his boat mooring out of use. There was a significant delay in repairing the ladder and Mr A was unable to access his boat during that time. The Ombudsman decided that the Council had missed opportunities to provide Mr A with an alternative mooring, which would have enabled him to have continued access to his boat. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement that within 2 weeks it would apply a reduction to the mooring fees for the period that Mr A was disadvantaged and issue him with a revised invoice.

Mrs K complained that the Council was threatening to bring enforcement action against her and her husband, Mr K, for failing to obtain listed building consent in respect of alterations to their property. Mrs K said that a planning officer who visited the property in July 2019 told them that listed building consent would not be required for the proposed building works. She said a compliance investigation was closed in 2023 concluding that there had been no breaches, but that a new investigation was opened later that year, after they had agreed a sale of the property. She said that the Council told parties to the sale about the compliance investigation, causing the sale to fall through. She said that, in addition to the distress and anxiety caused, they had incurred significant legal costs, including to settle a claim for breach of contract. The Ombudsman noted that an independent investigation carried out at Stage 2 of the Council’s complaints process had upheld Mrs K’s complaint that there had been a failure to provide appropriate guidance to Mr and Mrs K in respect of listed building consents. The Ombudsman considered that the financial redress previously offered by the Council was insufficient, taking into account that, had they been appropriately advised, it was unlikely that Mr and Mrs K would have sought to sell the property. In settlement of the complaint to the Ombudsman, the Council agreed to apologise for the impact of its failure to provide appropriate information about the need for listed building consent, and to make a financial redress payment of £1,044. This included £294 which had previously been offered by the Council, and an additional £750 in respect of the significant distress caused to Mr and Mrs K by the Council’s failings.

Mrs P complained that Ceredigion County Council had refused to consider her social services complaint as it did not meet the qualifying criteria of a complaint. The Ombudsman found that although some elements of the complaint did relate to court proceedings, there was one issue that could be considered under the Social Services complaints process. The Ombudsman decided that there had been a failure by the Council to consider this particular issue. She said this had caused inconvenience and frustration for Mrs P. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to, within 2 weeks, apologise to Mrs P and provide her with a social services stage one acknowledgement letter.

Mr A complained that the Council failed to take appropriate action to meet his social care needs following the completion of a Stage 2 complaints investigation in June 2023. The Ombudsman noted that mitigating factors which had made it harder for the Council to meet Mr A’s unmet needs were still relevant after June 2023. However, the Ombudsman was concerned that there had been a missed opportunity after June 2023 to engage more effectively with Mr A’s concerns about the recommendations of the Stage 2 investigation report. As a result, there was a delay in arranging a re-assessment of Mr A’s needs and implementing efforts to explore ways of meeting his unmet needs. The Ombudsman considered that it was appropriate to discontinue the investigation on the basis that the Council agreed to carry out the following actions, within 1 month, to rebuild the relationship of trust with Mr A: a) Write to Mr A to apologise for the failure to engage effectively with him in relation to his concerns about the recommendations of the Stage 2 investigation report, and for the resulting delay in arranging a re-assessment of his needs. b) Offer Mr A the opportunity for a meeting with the Director of Social Services, to take place following the completion of the re-assessment of his needs.

Ms A complained on behalf of her client that he was dissatisfied with Ceredigion County Council’s Stage 2 complaint response. She said that her client was concerned about some of the information contained in the Council’s report and how he had been communicated with. Her client was also unhappy with some of the wording used and he wanted clarity on some of the explanations the Council had provided. The Ombudsman decided that the Council had not offered Ms A’s client the opportunity to discuss the contents of its response, in line with the Social Services Complaints Procedure (Wales) Regulations (2014). She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to offer Ms A’s client an apology and an opportunity to meet to discuss the contents of the complaint response, within 10 working days

Ms G complained that Ceredigion County Council failed to respond to a complaint, and failed to provide information, relating to a complaint she raised in April 2024, concerning the disrepair of a communal wall. The Ombudsman found that the Council overlooked the complaint. This caused additional frustration and uncertainty for Ms G. She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman gained the Council’s agreement to immediately write to Ms G apologising for its oversight and confirm that the complaint was logged at Stage 2 of its complaint process. It also agreed to issue its response within 4 weeks.

Mr P complained that Ceredigion County Council had repeatedly failed to collect his refuse waste. The Ombudsman found that Mr P had complained to the Council, but it had failed to process the complaint in accordance with its complaints procedure and had not considered the complaint at stage two. The Ombudsman said this caused inconvenience and uncertainty for Mr P. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to apologise to Mr P for not processing the complaint correctly and to provide Mr P with a stage two complaint response within20 working days.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that a Former Member (“the Former Member”) of Ceredigion County Council (“the County Council”) and Aberystwyth Town Council (“the Town Council”) breached the Code of Conduct.  It was alleged that the Former Member had been involved in a number of separate incidents of inappropriate harassing and stalking behaviour towards women.  Our finding, under section 69 of the Local Government Act 2000, was that our report on our investigation be referred to the President of the Adjudication Panel for Wales, for adjudication by a tribunal. The Tribunal found that the Former Member had failed to comply with the Code of Conduct.  Its sanction was to disqualify the Former Member from being a member of any Relevant Authority, as set out in the Local Government Act 2000, for 3 years. The  Case Tribunal’s decision is available here .

The Ombudsman received a complaint that a Member (“the Member”) of Powys County Council (“the Council”) breached the Code of Conduct.  The behaviour complained about took place when the Member had been elected to both the Council and Bannau Brycheiniog National Park Authority (“the Authority”).  The investigation was extended to include consideration of this role on the Authority, the Member subsequently resigned from this position. Our finding, under section 69 of the Local Government Act 2000, was that our report on our investigation be referred to the respective Standards Committees of the Council and the Authority.  Those bodies both elected to refer the matter under relevant regulations to Ceredigion County Council’s Standards Committee, for their consideration.  The Committee found that the Member had failed to comply with the Code of Conduct, in respect of both the Council and the Authority.  The Committee determined that it was appropriate to censure the Member in respect of the breaches found in respect of both the Council and the Authority’s Codes of Conduct. Additionally, the Committee made training recommendations. The Committee’s decision is available here https://powys.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s90124/Pwyllgor%20Safonau%20a%20Moeseg%20-%20Ethics%20and%20Standards%20Committee%20Cyngor%20Sir%20Ceredigion%20County%20Council%20-%20.pdf .

Mr A complained that Ceredigion County Council (“the Council”) failed to provide a response to his complaint about how it handled his planning application. The Council said it was unable to investigate Mr A’s complaint because it was about the decision to refuse his planning application and therefore it remained open to him to appeal. The Ombudsman decided that the Council had overlooked aspects of Mr A’s complaint. It had wrongly determined that Mr A’s entire complaint fell outside the statutory complaints procedure. She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to identify the aspects of Mr A’s complaint that can be considered under the statutory complaints process, offer Mr A an apology for the delay and agree to provide a Stage 2 complaint response, within 5 working days.

Ms E complained that Ceredigion County Council forced her mother into a residential care home without consent and is now attempting to reclaim the costs incurred. The Ombudsman found that the Council failed to investigate the concerns Ms E raised under its complaints process advising her instead that it was properly made decision. The Ombudsman decided that the Council could not determine that it was a properly made decision without a formal investigation. This caused additional frustration and inconvenience to Ms E. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to apologise to Ms E and log the concerns as a formal complaint, acknowledging receipt within 5 working days The Council also agreed to issue Ms E a £50 payment for the inconvenience.

Mr T complained that Ceredigion County Council failed to acknowledge or provide a response to his complaint about trees. The Ombudsman decided that the Council had failed to acknowledge any of Mr T’s letters and had not logged his concerns as a complaint. She said that this caused frustration and uncertainty to Mr T. She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to provide a written apology and explanation to Mr T for the failure to respond to his letters, undertake a review of its internal process and ensure that any identified system failures are addressed to prevent this happening again and issue a Stage 2 complaint response within 4 weeks.

Mr H complained that Ceredigion County Council had failed to respond to a complaint he raised regarding its Highways Department in November2022. The Ombudsman found that the Council issued a Stage 1 and 2response which led Mr H to raise additional concerns in January 2023. The Council has failed to respond to the additional concerns. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation and sought and gained the Council’s agreement to apologise to Mr H and discuss with him his outstanding concerns within two weeks. The Council will then formally address those concerns in writing.

Ms L complained that Ceredigion County Council failed to respond to her complaint of July 2022, and further failed to respond to her most recent communication of February 2023. The Ombudsman decided that although the Council had responded to Ms L within its statutory complaint’s procedure timeframe, it appeared that Ms L had not received this. She also decided that there had been a significant delay in the Councils response to Ms L’s recent communication and said this caused frustration to Ms L. As an alternative to an investigation, the Ombudsman sought and gained the Councils agreement to provide Ms L with an apology for the delay in responding to her recent communication, provide her with a copy of the Councils Stage 1 response, and provide further details on its complaint’s procedure within 30 working days.

Ms A complained about the amount of time it had taken Ceredigion County Council (“the Council”) to address a complaint they had submitted. The Ombudsman found that the Council had taken an unreasonably long time to address Ms A’s complaint. She said that this caused delays and frustration for Ms A. She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to apologise to Ms A, offer a £250 redress payment in recognition of time and trouble and commence Stage 1 of the statutory complaints process within 15 working days.

Mrs F complained that Ceredigion County Council declined to investigate her complaint about a commissioned care provider because it was satisfied with the care provider’s complaint response. The Ombudsman decided that the Council had not fulfilled its duty to accept Mrs F’s complaint in line with the Social Services Complaint Procedure. She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Council’s agreement to establish Mrs F’s outstanding concerns within 20 working days and to provide an appropriate complaint response.

Ms A complained about the Council’s failure to properly implement the terms of an early resolution undertaken in September 2020. Ms A was aggrieved that a Carer’s Assessment was not properly completed and that there remained significant uncertainty about respite care. Ms A was also aggrieved that the Council appeared to take an inconsistent approach to Direct Payment uplift. The Ombudsman was satisfied that the terms of the early resolution had been met, based on the information available at the time. However, it since transpired that the information provided by the Council in respect of the Carer’s Assessment had been inaccurate. The matter had progressed significantly since then and the assessment had become outdated. The Ombudsman, therefore, sought and obtained the Council’s agreement to arrange a ‘fresh’ Carer’s Assessment, with the same Independent Social Worker as previously used, within 6 weeks. The Ombudsman also sought and obtained the Council’s agreement to write to Ms A within 6 weeks to provide clarity regarding respite care and its provision. It was determined that Ms A should complain about the Direct Payment uplift issue to the Council, in the first instance, to provide it with an opportunity to investigate and respond, before bringing any complaint about that issue to this office.

Mrs X complained about the way in which the Council had handled a safeguarding concern she had raised about her father, including in respect of record-keeping, decision-making and a failure to issue to her previously agreed information about case law relied upon and financial redress in recognition of her time and trouble in pursuing her complaint. The Ombudsman declined to investigate the substantive complaint issues, which had already been examined under the statutory Social Services complaints procedure. However, in respect of the Council’s failure to meet with previously agreed obligations, the Ombudsman asked the Council to, within 20 working days, provide Mrs X with an explanation of the application of the case law it was relying upon, together with £500 and an apology for the failure to provide both the information and the previously agreed financial redress. The Ombudsman considered this to be an appropriate settlement and did not investigate.