LG & SC Ombudsman Anmeldelser 

Good for nothing, few times reported incidents to them about Council Highways damaged to my property and driveway as the council would not take no responsibility, Ombudsman is good for nothing, anything to do with Authority they don't want to know and close the case file. Not competent to take up any challenge, they are just existing as face value, not a real service, just ticking the Boxes, no action.

I waited patiently for seven months for LGSCO to get around to investigating my complaint about the local Council. When they finally did, they completely misinterpreted my complaint and fundamentally misrepresented it in their decision. They didn’t even bother to contact me to confirm whether their understanding was correct. Having entirely misunderstood my complaint, they went on to simply reiterate what the Council had told them as though it was fact, without any attempt to verify it and without any reference to or consideration of the significant evidence I had provided to counter it. Based on the LGSCO’s response, it seems unlikely that they had even read my submission. Consequently, I raised a service complaint about LGSCO’s handling of the case: that it was biased, failed to engage with evidence, and was lacking in reasoned decision-making. LGSCO refused to consider it. Something is seriously wrong when a body appointed to act in the public interest considers itself beyond reproach or complaint from the very people they exist to serve! If my experience is anything to go by, perhaps LGSCO should consider renaming itself: Local Government’s Systemically Complicit Ombudsman.

I have sent the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman pre-action letters in the past, and received responses from its solicitors, Bevan Brittan LLP.

Today, I logged into Ombudsman's online portal, and noted that a complaint that I have escalated to this organisation, which I have not sent a pre-action letter in respect to, currently at the assessment stage, was assigned "Bevan Brittan" as the Case Worker (normally this should be the name of a person employed by the Ombudsman). I understand other people have reported the same issue. In my honest opinion, this demonstrates perfectly that the Ombudsman's solicitors are heavily influencing their decisions, who, needless to say, see the government as their client.

It gets even worse, as some of the complaints that I have escalated to this organisation, not decided upon, have completely disappeared from its online portal.

In my honest opinion, this organisation is extremely sinister, unethical and cynical. The Ombudsman is considered a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), so anyone seeking to issue a judicial review challenge is obligated to use its services first, whether they would like to or not. In my honest opinion, the government, and the Ombudsman, is opportunistically capitalising on this, whilst cynically seeking to undermine the position of anyone who seeks to bring a judicial review challenge, or any form of legal action, against public bodies such as local authorities.

Completely useless, even stated that they knew what I was thinking (did not know they had psychic powers!) and when I disagreed with them I was told it would would cost me if I took it further.

Where do I start - supposed to be impartial, not impartial whatsoever from the investigator to the Assistant Ombudsman - they do not even know the law! But admit the council is at fault!! contradictions throughout the report - a year later, still fighting this organisation. My advice is to be persistent if it is not right and there are misapplications of law and contradictions, pursue it, and go to post-decision review. It is about getting justice, made me very unwell, but I will fight them all the way to the High Court.

Absoluteley useless! They are supposed to be an alternative route to the courts yet refuse to investigate breach of human rights and the equality act refuse to act when the council has acted grossly and negligently.
I had to wait over two years for this pathetic excuse of an investigation. what a farce. do not trust them.

Absolutely useless. I have contacted them twice and been informed someone would contact me within 15 days well that is a joke. My elderly mother lives in Portsmouth and she has to live with anti social behaviour from the youths in her flats and councial wont do a thing . But it seems as though the ombudsman is the same its a service us taxpayers pay to use but they are a big failure.

The Local Government Ombudsman twice declined to investigate Hertfordshire County Council's intentional omission of yellow-lining on the narrow road behind our property, upon which the presence of parked vehicles has caused repeated damage to this property which we have had to repair at our own expense. The Council's actions in permitting this parking also amount to a breach of section 130 of the Highways Act 1980, as large vehicles run over the verge in the presence on this narrow road of parked vehicles, and struggle to enter or to leave our side-street due to these parked vehicles. Eventually, my e-mail address was cut off by Jane Stewart - one of the managers at the Ombudsman, who repeatedly refused to listen.

The experiences with the Ombudsman took place earlier than the date shown. But its shocking ruthlessness necessitates recording here.

You can see the problem on Instant Google Street View. For instance, if you: (i) place 'SG2 7EU' into the search thereon, then (ii) rotate the view so that the red arrow points up and the white arrow points down, and then (iii) press the lower arrow 12 times, i.e., until '14, Aston End Road, Aston, England' is shown, you can see that large moving vehicles are required to squeeze past the parked vehicles on the narrow Aston End Road in order to pass and also to turn into our side-street (St. Mary's Close). Since its insertion in 2022, the black ball-and-chain fence protects our land from being damaged, although this fence itself has since been damaged many times, and we have had to repair it at those times at our own expense (as we did previously with damage to the verge and corner - which are now behind the ball-and-chain fence).

Dire
I am trying to get a complaint resolved regarding my mum getting entitled free care …. Absolutely disgusting the way we have been treated… I sent in my complaint Nov 2025…it’s May 2026.. still not heard from the ombudsman… WTF .?

Camden Council did not provide care home accommodation for a very ill man leaving hospital, they offered a temporary placement when having to move again would be detrimental to the healthy of the this elderly and very sick person. The Ombudsman refused to investigate because they said that the decision was not fatal despite the fact that this elderly person died very soon afterwards

On a new occasion, they couldn't wait to tell me I hadn't enough evidence. But they did this by sending an email from a No reply address. They did it without calling me to discuss what I explained so far. The fact is, the Equality Advisory and Support Services are involved and it's serious - but then, all our complaints are serious. They are always ongoing, while we wait for LGSCO support. What on earth is this organisation for?
***
This was my original post:
A reasonable formal complaint was referred to this ombudsman service. Communications were immediately tricky and ultimately I was very unhappy with the outcome.
This phrase has been borrowed from a post below: Without doubt the LGSCO needs to be regulated.

As so many before have said, do not waste any time and effort contacting yet another inept taxpayer funded operation. It has taken 5 months for a complaint to be considered and subsequently dismissed within 2 hours of the complaint being reviewed, stating insufficient evidence of loss! There were however documented evidence of the local council not following their own guidelines/procedures but this has been overlooked and the complaint dismissed. How on earth are we to get the Local Councils to improve when documented failings are dismissed with no guidance to improve! Dreadful!

Terrible. The LGSCO have not bothered to read and understand our complaint properly. We complained about the handling of our daughters EHCP by the local education authority. The LEA had acted dishonestly by sending paperwork to the wrong address and ignoring the legal tests that need to be met for a needs assessment which significantly delayed the issue of the EHCP. The LGSCO dismissed our complaint on the grounds they claim new information was submitted at mediation, ignoring the fact that the legal tests were met at the time the application was made, and that the LEA did not know parents were funding support, which is irrelevant and factually incorrect. In challenging the decision and pointing out various facts, the LGSCO claimed we had changed our mind about certain elements which is simply not true. The LGSCO have also completely ignored the dishonestly of the LEA in issuing paperwork to the wrong address and disregarded the legal tests. The LGSCO are facilitating LEAs everywhere to kick the can down the road as much as they like when it comes to the EHCP process and are failing children up and down the country.

I made an FOI request for information about an unsuccessful complaint regarding a care home in their decision notices. I had had to complain about the same care home chain and I saw similarities in the two complaints. My complaint had had to go to the dreadful PHSO not the LG and SCO, but I knew from another unrelated complaint that the LG and SCO staff were perfectly capable of cherry-picking bits of a complaint and failing to say they had ignored part of the complaint in the decision notice.
The response to my FOI request was that after a year they destroyed all paperwork so I was out of time with my request. So; if you see a decision that looks similar to your own complaint or you think something is missing; make an FOI request fast. Also; if you wish to make a Subject Access Request for your own information handled by the Ombudsman staff, do that within a year too.

Totally pointless.

Utter waste of time that isnt fit for purpose.

I had a freedom of information released that said the council would never do, what i had in black and white thay they did do.

The ombudman didnt even address my complaint fully. They picked one part. Cherry picked the things the council said that supported closing my case and ignored the parts the council did say that validated my complaint.

Utterly useless and bias.

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is sold to the public as an independent watchdog that holds councils accountable when they fail residents. In practice, it functions more like a case-closing machine that shields councils from proper scrutiny.
My experience was stark. After nearly two years of repeated bin collection failures, false “bin not out” records, failed monitoring periods, and clear signs of retaliatory targeting, the Ombudsman acknowledged fault but then rubber-stamped the Council’s ineffective apologies and monitoring as “appropriate and proportionate”. The underlying problem continues to this day. The decision simply closed the file.
Even worse, when I requested a review pointing out factual errors and ignored evidence, the Assistant Ombudsman rejected it in a handful of lines, addressing only one narrow procedural point while completely ignoring the rest. This is not oversight — it is administrative convenience dressed up as process.
The structural problem is obvious: there is no meaningful external check on Ombudsman decisions short of judicial review in the High Court — a route that is expensive, complex, and out of reach for ordinary residents. As a result, flawed decisions stand, poor council performance is normalised, and residents are left exactly where they started.
The LGSCO is funded by public money to protect citizens from maladministration. Instead, it appears to prioritise workload management and case closure over genuine resolution. This is not just disappointing — it is a betrayal of its statutory purpose and a waste of taxpayers’ money.
The system urgently needs independent evaluation. Parliament and government should examine whether the Ombudsman’s review process actually works, whether it properly addresses persistent and systemic failures, and whether the lack of real accountability is undermining public confidence in local government oversight.
Until that happens, the LGSCO risks becoming part of the problem rather than the solution.

Very poor experience with this organisation. Took months to respond to what should have been a simple case. In my opinion and based on my experience LGSCO are biased, a view which appears to be shared by most other reviewers. I would certainly not recommend.

I would prefer not to give them even one star but it doesn't work like that. I complained to my local social services about the support (or rather lack of support) they had deemed appropriate for my son, who has a learning disability. When I didn't get any joy from them I took my complaint to the Local Ombudsman. I was under the impression that they would be able to judge the fairness of the assessment of my son made by DCC social services and the lack of appropriate provision made in his budget. I was not informed at the start of the process that the Local Ombudsman would only be able to investigate whether social services had looked into my complaint. I think it should be made clear to people before the Ombudsman takes on their case that they are only able to look at whether the county council in question has investigated the complaint and as long as a Lead Disability person (who has never met the cared-for person) and is relying on reports from a social worker (who has only met him twice) has written an email concerning the complaint then that will be considered as sufficient action taken to investigate the complaint.
When I tried to complain to the Local Ombudsman about their service I found the staff of the Coventry branch of the Local Ombudsman very rude, arrogant and even threatening, telling me I could ask for a judicial review but warning me that I could be liable to pay betweeen £2,000 to £3,000 if I was unsucessful.
I made several complaints, even going so far as to write to the Chief Executive, Amardeep Clarke but I never received any apology from them for wasting my time for a whole year!

Our local councill have wasted £40000
Of tax payeres money on a so called redressing of the road out side of my house.
It is now worse than before no one at bristol city councill will take action on this matter and lc & sc onbidsmon have closed the case after an 18 week delay
Due to lack of evedence .
Do thease people not have eyes can they not see or is that they are just unintrested in taxpayers money being wasted

Investigator ignored evidence and refused to investigate on incorrect facts
My experience with the Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman was extremely poor and has seriously undermined my confidence in the service.
The issue was not simply that my complaint was rejected — it was the way the investigator handled it.
I provided a fully evidenced complaint about a council’s failure to comply with agreed Flood Risk Assessment safeguards, causing ongoing flood risk, loss of amenity and significant distress. I supplied:
• a detailed chronology
• documentary evidence
• written confirmations from previous Ombudsman investigators
• and a formal Council letter explicitly accepting my complaint for investigation after review
Despite this, the investigator refused to investigate on the basis that the issue had “already been investigated”.
This was demonstrably wrong.
The Council itself had confirmed in writing that the complaint was new and would be “thoroughly investigated” and a “comprehensive response” provided. Yet this key document was simply ignored.
The investigator:
• disregarded relevant evidence
• failed to address determinative submissions
• relied on incorrect factual assumptions
• mischaracterised the scope of the complaint
• adopted the Council’s position without scrutiny
• and provided reasoning that directly contradicted the documentary record
There was no meaningful engagement with the evidence I provided. It felt like the conclusion had already been decided and the facts were made to fit.
Most concerningly, the Ombudsman refused to investigate because it claimed the Council already had — while the Council said it had not and had accepted the complaint for investigation. Both positions cannot logically be true, yet the investigator did not address this contradiction.
The result is that neither the Council nor the Ombudsman has actually examined the substantive issue. The complaint has simply been pushed away on procedural grounds.
That is not independent oversight.
It is not impartial.
And it is not what the Ombudsman service exists to provide.
I expected a fair, evidence-based review. Instead, I experienced a process where key facts were overlooked and the investigator appeared to side with the authority being complained about.
Very disappointing and far below the standard of accountability the public should expect.