Decision search


What's this ?
  • Organisation
  • Decision type

  • Reference number
  • Date range

     

  • Sort Results

Show advanced search

Your search has 34 results

  • Staffordshire County Council (22 013 812)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 14-Feb-2023

    Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions in assessing Mr X and his family as part of child protection work. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The matters complained of are not separable from matters that have or could reasonably have been raised during court proceedings.

  • Manchester City Council (22 013 633)

    Statement Upheld Other 14-Feb-2023

    Summary: We uphold Mr and Mrs X’s complaint the Council has failed to reply to their complaint within its Children Act statutory complaints’ procedure. The Council has now agreed to do so.

  • City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (22 014 363)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 14-Feb-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s historic child protection actions. The complaint is late and there is no good reason to exercise our discretion to investigate it now.

  • Suffolk County Council (22 014 532)

    Statement Upheld Other 14-Feb-2023

    Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed considering a complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council has now agreed to resolve the complaint by issuing its stage two response without delay and offering to make a payment to the complainant to remedy the time and trouble they have been too.

  • Manchester City Council (22 012 734)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 14-Feb-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s action taken following her reports to it about the care of two children. She does not have parental responsibility for the children.

  • Cumbria County Council (22 014 752)

    Statement Upheld Other 14-Feb-2023

    Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed considering a complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council has now agreed to resolve the complaint by completing a stage two investigation without delay and offering to make a payment to the complainant to remedy the time and trouble they have been too.

  • Buckinghamshire Council (22 003 404)

    Statement Upheld Friends and family carers 13-Feb-2023

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council considered her complaint through the children’s statutory complaint procedure but failed to provide Special Guardianship payments it owed her, or explain why her grandchildren remained on a child protection plan for longer than necessary. The Council was at fault for failing to properly consider Mrs X’s complaint about the matters and for failing to identify the payments it owed Mrs X. The Council agreed to pay Mrs X the £8,838.88 in special guardianship payments it owes and £500 to recognise the frustration, confusion and time and trouble caused to her by its faults.

  • Lancashire County Council (22 014 289)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 13-Feb-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s children’s services involvement with the complainant’s family. This is because the Council’s decision not to investigate the complaint until after court proceedings have concluded was not affected by fault.

  • Gloucestershire County Council (21 018 905)

    Statement Upheld Disabled children 10-Feb-2023

    Summary: Miss Y complains about the process followed by the Council when assessing her son’s social care needs. Miss Y also complains about delays in the application process for a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG). We find fault in some parts of the complaint, and the Council has agreed to undertake the actions listed at the end of this statement.

  • Leeds City Council (22 003 162)

    Statement Not upheld Child protection 10-Feb-2023

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of a referral about him to its Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO). The was no fault in the Council’s handling of this case or Mr X’s subsequent complaints.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings