Yorkshire council delayed family's Christmas outing with abuse questioning

The complaint, which also involved a meeting arranged between the complainant’s wife and her abusive ex-partner, was among 15 upheld by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman from 2021-22.

Other complaints relating to East Riding Council included refusing a man an allowance to care for his sister and failing to accept a homelessness application to rehouse a woman with urgent medical and welfare needs.

Lisa Nicholson, a deputy monitoring officer at the council’s Legal and Democratic Services department, said the council had fully implemented recommendations made for each complaint and lessons had been learned.

The report to the council’s overview management and scrutiny committee showed the 15 upheld complaints were from a total 25 investigated in detail, out of 102 made to the Ombudsman. The rest were either not upheld, closed after initial enquiries, referred back for a local resolution, saw advice given or were incomplete or invalid.

The yearly total was up from 45 in 2020-21, when Ombudsman probes were scaled back due to coronavirus, 67 in 2019-20 and 86 in 2018-19. The report stated the council accepted there had been poor communication and service and a failure to follow procedures over the abuse complaint.

The complainant said the council had been heavy-handed and intrusive when it investigated concerns around the abuse of his wife’s children and insensitive with its delay of the Christmas outing. The council wrote to the family to apologise and paid £500 for distress caused, on top of £500 and £200 paid to two children.

The authority paid a total of £450 to the woman it failed to accept a homelessness application for after the Ombudsman upheld her complaint. The complainant said their refusal left her living in unsuitable accommodation for longer than necessary which affected her physical and mental wellbeing.

Other upheld complaints included the council taking 12 months to respond to a woman about unfounded allegations made against her as a foster carer. The council paid £450 for the distress, time taken and resulting uncertainty and agreed a raft of changes including responding to future complaints without delay.

Upheld complaints also included failing to reopen day services following the first coronavirus lockdown, impacting a woman, and taking two years to respond to safeguarding concerns concerning another woman’s father.

The council also apologised and paid £200 to a man left living next to an over-dominant house after approving a planning application based on incorrect information about its height.

Three more complaints were also upheld by the Housing Ombudsman during the same period. Ms Nicholson said around 2,000 cases were referred to the Ombudsman each year, about 100 to 150 of which were escalated. The officer added 15 being upheld last year showed those where the council was found to be at fault were relatively small.

The officer told the committee: “The council employs around 10,000 staff making decisions across 600 services. We don’t just pay lip service to these complaints, actions are monitored and lessons are learnt.”

The report stated the council accepted the findings of each upheld complaint and took action to remedy the failure.

It stated: “Each upheld case represents a failure by the council in respect of the service that it has provided to one or more of its residents. It is important therefore that the council accepts such failures, acts to rectify them, and seeks to ensure that they do not occur in future.”