Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of child protection matters concerning her grandchild. She complains about the Council’s poor administration, that it included wrong information in the paperwork, and that assumptions were presented as facts. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council’s actions. We have recommended the Council apologise, pay a financial remedy, and to amend the wrong information.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain on behalf of their daughter, Y and state the Council has failed to provide the post adoption support she needs. They say it delayed when dealing with their request for help and gave poor and conflicting advice about the type of support that is available. The Ombudsman has found the Council was at fault for the way it assessed Y’s needs, the way it handled Mr and Mrs X’s request for funding, and for failing to provide clear information and advice about the post adoption support process. It was also at fault for taking too long to initiate the EHC needs assessment process and for not following the children’s statutory complaint procedure. These failures put Y at risk of harm and caused Mr and Mrs X distress, plus they incurred time and trouble when pursuing their complaint about this matter. To remedy this injustice, the Council has agreed to consider what support it will provide the family and make payments to them. It has also agreed to make several service improvements to prevent the faults identified from reoccurring.

Summary: The Ombudsman should not investigate Mr J’s complaint about children’s services’ involvement with his family, because it would be reasonable for Mr J to raise in court the issues he now raises with us.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s response to his request for information. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is the appropriate body to consider his concerns.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a children services officer’s conduct and an assessment. It is unlikely our investigation could significantly add to the Council’s response.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot and should not investigate Mr F’s complaint about the Council’s involvement with his family, because the issues are tied up with the court’s consideration of events.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr A’s complaint that the Council has failed to provide him with support and has given misleading information in court. The matter Mr A complains about have been, or can be, considered in court.

Summary: Mrs B complains the Council’s failure to provide suitable transport to school for her son, who has special educational needs, meant he was out of education for an extended period in 2018. The Ombudsman finds there was fault by the Council in this matter, leading to injustice for which a remedy has been agreed.

Summary: The Ombudsman should not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that she incurred costs in appealing to SEND. It is reasonable to expect Mrs X to have used her right to ask the Tribunal to order the Council pay her costs.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to address his complaints about children’s services, causing distress. The Ombudsman finds the Council failed to follow the statutory children’s complaints process. The Ombudsman recommends the Council provides an apology, payment, progresses Mr X’s complaints in line with the statutory process and reviews it procedures.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr A’s complaint that the Council shared his personal information without his consent. This is because he may bring the matter to the attention of the Information Commissioner.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to investigate his concerns about his ex-partner. He also says the Council provided false information to the Court and breached his confidentiality. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find fault in the way the Council dealt with his report. Also, complaints about Court reports are outside his jurisdiction. And Mr X can ask the Information Commissioner’s Officer to consider his complaint about a breach of confidentiality.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions concerning a primary school becoming an academy, because we cannot investigate complaints about actions concerning schools.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council made false allegations about the complainant and made a false report to the police. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a data breach. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider it. And Mrs Q may go to court if she would like compensation.

Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to arrange education for Mrs B’s son for 19 weeks after he was permanently excluded from school. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs B and to make a payment of £2,650 to recognise the injustice caused.

Summary: There is no fault in relation to this complaint that a school transport appeals panel failed to properly consider Mr F’s appeal against a decision by Hampshire County Council to withdraw home to school transport.

Summary: Ms K complains the Council failed to properly consider her school transport appeal. The Ombudsman considers there is no fault by the Council or the appeal panel.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council failing to provide education to her son who has special educational needs. Ms X has appealed the current position to the SEND Tribunal. The Council says it will deal with a complaint about failure to provide education once the appeal is concluded.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council assessed the special educational needs of her son. Mrs X has appealed to the SEND Tribunal.

Summary: Mrs P complained the Council failed to offer her family sufficient respite. At the time her child, Q, was out of school with no provision. The Council has agreed to make a financial settlement, including reimbursing Mrs P for avoidable expenses and for Q’s missed education, and to consider providing respite.

Summary: Mr X complains for his grandson, Y, about the conduct of Y’s social worker and the delay in Mr X being allowed contact with Y. Mr X is does not have parental responsibility for Y and the Ombudsman cannot investigate without written authority or confirmation of his suitability to act on Y’s behalf. Matters relating to contact are for the Court to decide. In addition, complaints about a social worker’s professional conduct are dealt with by the Health and Care Professionals Council.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about a children services social worker’s report. This is a Court ordered report and we cannot investigate legal proceedings. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to complain to the Health and Care Professions Council about the social worker’s professionalism.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss A’s complaint that the Council has placed her children in foster care. Miss A may take the matter to court and it would be reasonable for her to do so.