LG & SC Ombudsman Anmeldelser 

⭐☆☆☆☆
Escalation to Senior Management – Serious Safeguarding and Accountability Failure

I am posting this to ensure senior management visibility, as my experience has revealed a serious breakdown in safeguarding accountability and transparency.

I raised safeguarding concerns about my vulnerable parent. Manchester City Council acknowledged the concerns, carried out internal processes, and closed the matter. I then escalated to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman has now refused to investigate, not because the concerns lacked seriousness, but because they say “no worthwhile outcome is achievable” and that unresolved family conflict places the matter outside their remit. They have directed that only the Court of Protection can resolve the situation.

This outcome highlights a deeply troubling gap in the system:
• Safeguarding concerns are effectively closed without independent scrutiny
• Family conflict is used as a reason not to investigate, rather than as a safeguarding risk factor
• The complainant is denied access to information, while being told they lack authority to challenge decisions
• Responsibility is repeatedly deflected between institutions, leaving vulnerable people without effective protection

At no point has there been meaningful accountability, transparency, or reassurance that safeguarding failures cannot recur.

I am sharing this publicly so that senior leaders are aware that the current processes allow serious safeguarding concerns to be dismissed procedurally rather than addressed substantively.

This is not about dissatisfaction with an outcome — it is about a systemic failure to provide effective safeguarding oversight.

Not only do they send template rejections, but their 'info@' email address is dead (550 error), and their 'intake' address is restricted. They have effectively insulated themselves from accountability. If you want to challenge a decision, they make it as technically difficult as possible.

The LGSCO’s latest Annual Report reveals they are funded by a £12.5 million grant from the public purse, with £10.95 million spent on staffing. Despite their own accounts stating that each case costs the taxpayer an average of £887, my experience suggests this money is being wasted on a "reject-by-default" culture.

I raised a specific, nuanced query regarding the Council’s corporate accounting methodology and transparency—a clear matter of local government administration. Instead of a reasoned legal determination, I was met with three successive template responses. When I challenged this, Intake Team Manager Andrew Grice issued a "final" refusal to correspond further, effectively deadlocking the case without ever addressing the point of law raised.

It is a disgrace that a public body, costing nearly £900 per case, uses its resources to insulate itself from accountability rather than investigating systemic maladministration. They are failing their statutory duty under the Local Government Act 1974 while hiding behind a "finality" clause to silence legitimate grievances.

I am now escalating this service failure to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO). Taxpayers deserve an ombudsman that investigates, not one that manages its backlog by issuing formulaic rejections.

The LGO presents itself as an independent watchdog. In reality, it functions as a protective buffer for councils rather than for the public.

In my case, Sheffield City Council failed to engage with the vast majority of medical and professional evidence submitted about my disabled mother, relied on demonstrably incorrect facts, and ultimately told me they would “no longer reply” or accept further evidence. This is something the Ombudsman has previously ruled unlawful in other cases.

Rather than scrutinise this behaviour, the LGO chose to defend it. They repeatedly reframed my complaint as a disagreement with a housing decision, even though the core issue was that evidence had never been properly considered in the first place. When I challenged this, I was told that “it is not for us to consider medical evidence” – missing the point entirely. The problem was not their clinical judgment; it was their refusal to examine whether the council had ignored evidence at all.

The Ombudsman also accepted a council narrative about a housing “bid” based on redacted system logs that did not actually show who placed it, while dismissing my documented challenge to that claim. Safeguarding concerns, ignored correspondence from MPs, and a disregarded Pre-Action Protocol letter were effectively brushed aside as out of scope.

Even when the Ombudsman acknowledged that Sheffield had given unlawful advice to external applicants, they treated this as a one-off mistake and declined to consider whether others might have been affected. That choice prioritises institutional convenience over public protection.

If you are seeking genuine accountability, robust evidence handling, or meaningful scrutiny of council behaviour, this is not the service you will receive.

LGSCO are responsible for having forced me down to a point in my life where I dread night time, and even the start of a new day due to constant noise.
There now exists a continuous disregard by governmental organisations to ignore illegal exploitation of people running business's from their homes.
This is destroying what was once the right of every living person, to enjoy the peace and quiet of their own homes.
For over a decade I have suffered 24/7 machinery noise followed up by outrageous slamming and banging from neighbours working from home and enjoying tax free cash.

My neighbours House/Factory, is completely ignored and even possibly condoned by both the council and their so-called (HE) noise services.
Instead of helping me, they made me their victim by reversing complaints to make me the one that got investigated.

Years ago you could at least phone the police and there intervention tended to have a more lasting effect.
However, these days you have to rely on what can only be described as a complete denial service from council organisations.

Even turning to the Ombudsman is now a completely pointless act.
First you have to subscribe to their limited service, and I say limited because they even tell you off if you send them information they haven't requested.
This information would normally provide proof such as accusations made within council replies.
Its difficult to correspond clearly, and signing in is also compulsory.
You have no clear way to send them anything other than the start and end rejection of your complaint by the BCC.
Therefore no details of wrongdoings are included, which is clearly designed for them to simply shut you down.
Its bad enough that people are already suffering, but this ridiculous lack of clear communication puts an even greater strain on people.

I'm personally disgusted and its about time councils and their so-called backup services were privatised.
The contemptuous and cavalier attitudes that I have experienced would leave me with a strong opinion that random drug testing should be carried out on governmental service employees.
Just as they do in many sports, which clearly makes the suggestion nothing outrageous!

I'm well aware that there are people out there suffering much worse than myself, so all I can say is stay strong my friends, club together, and we'll keep on fighting for our justice!

The Ombudsman service was once quite good, but LGSCO now appears to be shielding councils along with their unfit for purpose services!

This body should be abolished, as its existence is merely another box-ticking exercise. There is no proper engagement or independent assessment. It is obvious that even in clear cases involving multiple breaches and maladministration by councils, the LGO either rejects complaints or delivers decisions in the councils’ favour. The professionalism and qualifications of the investigators are also in question. Public money should be directed elsewhere instead of being used to maintain these so-called Ombudsmen.

Absolutely shit they blocked communications with myself due to them failing service level agreement, take advantage of people disabilities, think they are above the law, add extra time on your case when they already added time due to a back log absolutely useless needs a complete overhaul and the current staff sacked

Terrible, biased service. People who have no knowledge of mental health and discrimination against disability under the Equality Act 2010. All of these ombudsman services are the same. None are independent and ALL of them side with the authority, energy supplier, or whosoever else. Grow some compassion and put yourself in the shoes of the complainant, because it's never easy to have to complain. It's a stress, but we do it because an injustice has happened with the said authority or organisation.

And if you just look at your score on TP, it's terrible. You are clearly not running an effective service. Bunch of jobsworths.

Not fit for purpose and is biased in favour of councils.

I followed the council’s formal complaints procedure, encouraged by my MP, without any resolution. I therefore referred the matter to the Ombudsman. Preparing the complaint took several hours, including writing a detailed submission and gathering supporting evidence. I then experienced difficulties uploading the material to the Ombudsman’s online portal, an issue also reported by others.

I was informed by email that it would take 3 months for the case to be allocated to a case officer. After waiting the full three months, I received a further email stating that no action would be taken. The explanation cited funding pressures, a reason others have also encountered, and showed clear bias towards the council, despite apparent procedural breaches already having occurred.

No attempt was made to contact me, ask questions, or clarify any aspect of my complaint. The decision was simply issued and closed. The entire process was a waste of time and effort. Any confidence I had in the Ombudsman as an independent body was completely undermined, leaving the council free to continue without meaningful scrutiny or accountability.

I was particularly concerned to be told that the Ombudsman intended to publish its findings. which I have asked not to happen, as the matter remains ongoing with the council. I have received no response to that request.

The mental strain placed on my family over the past nineteen months has been severe and is ongoing, yet this appears to have been given no consideration at all. In hindsight, I regret not having seen the Trustpilot reviews before submitting the complaint. I am not surprised that 98% of complaints are 1 star.

The cost to taxpayers of maintaining a service that operates with such evident bias is likely to be significant. The Ombudsman does not deliver justice for those affected by council failings and does not provide effective accountability. As a result, individuals are left without recourse when councils fail to act fairly or lawfully.

Local government = government.
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman = government.

In other words, don't hold your breath in terms of getting an impartial and objective decision from the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.

I have escalated numerous complaints to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, and it has become abundantly clear that this organisation is incompetent, slapdash, extremely immoral, and bends over backwards for extremely unscrupulous Councils. I really don't know how some of its so-called "investigators" live with themselves.

The wisest approach would be to seek redress through the courts.

They made the process of logging a complaint very user-unfriendly with their online form. It is very difficult to attach emails, etc. When I called to request an email address (as I did not receive a response to a message I sent online) to forward all my communication with the body I complained about, after listening to all the options, they said they were unable to take my call and to call later. Very poor and feels like they made it difficult on purpose to discourage people from complaining. They should be ashamed.

I am extremely disappointed with my experience with the Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman regarding two SEND complaints. Despite providing detailed evidence and referencing the specific legal duties under the SEND Regulations 2014 and Children & Families Act 2014, key issues were dismissed or misunderstood.

For Child 1, the Ombudsman overlooked clear evidence that the final EHCP was issued 14 weeks after the draft, even though the legal limit is 8 weeks. I submitted this evidence before the decision was made, yet they stated it “fell outside the timeframe.” It didn’t. The explanation of staff sickness should not excuse statutory deadlines.

For Child 2, the Ombudsman dismissed the fact that the annual review was late for the second consecutive year, ignoring that the Local Authority is legally responsible for ensuring annual reviews are held within 12 months (Reg 20). They also accepted the LA issuing a final EHCP with **none** of the professional updates, including missing OT and SALT recommendations, outdated assessments, incorrect year group, and no progress from the previous year.

I escalated both complaints to an Assessment Manager, which took extra time, but her responses were brief, dismissive, and made it clear she had not properly read my escalation or the evidence attached.

The delays have pushed back my right to appeal by many months, and my child’s Tribunal is now scheduled for late 2025. This is the predictable consequence of missed statutory deadlines, yet the Ombudsman dismissed this too.

My experience has shown a worrying lack of understanding of SEND law and a willingness to accept Local Authority explanations without proper scrutiny. The system urgently needs reform so that children with special educational needs and disabilities are properly protected and Local Authorities are held accountable when they fail to meet their legal duties.

If I could zero stars I would. I submitted a complaint earlier on this year which they wouldn’t accept as I hadn’t completed the councils complaints process- fair enough. I did then complete the councils complaints process and submitted a more robust complaint to the Ombudsman with plenty of evidence. Guess what they did- they only went and merged my two complaints together and investigated my original complaint. The outcome- you need to complete the councils complaints process. Absolute waste of time and not fit for purpose. They are difficult to get hold of, they ignore you, they don’t reply to any case messages you submit and just accept what the council tells them without question. There needs to be a public enquiry about them

They were nice. Ultimately what’s the point of thi organisation if they allow a council to openly discriminate against a disabled person for the type of housing they need, allow failure to spot an updated document and query why because they council state themselves it wouldn’t have changed anything - how would you know if you didn’t spot or query it? And to fail to safeguard a person they have a duty of care to.
How is a risk to life evidenced by medical professionals not a band a, when that is literally the category.
What is the point in a senior body that allows the council to make their own policies that discriminate against vulnerable people against medical advise, and allows failures because they decide it isn’t a failure. I’m sure if something happens it will be the usual lessons will be learned rubbish.

This is a big corrupt organisation, ran by ex local authority workers, who ignore evidence and facts and never properly investigate complaints.

I have raised serious issues with Tower Hamlets and have been ignored. I requested for my complaint to be reviewed again by the chief ombudsman and the case investigator to this day has ignored my request.

We don't need a organisation like this around anymore, needs to be shut down with immediate effect. I think the reviews here speak for themselves.

Don't waste your time taking your complaint to them, just take it straight to court

LGSCO struggle to comprehend laws and apply, 1st time I used them, there was difficulties understanding the term extricibly linked to tribunal and again another struggle to enforce the equality act connected to council providing free school meals to children who meet the criteria. They state not all EOTAS children are entitled to FSM, correct and agree with this but the children who are entitled to fsm in school would still be entitled with EOTAS. It is legal statutory to apply the equality act.

Then it is a privilege. Considering how long some consumers have waited before allocation of their cases, I'm the lucky one. Shot down before any effing consideration. LGSCO as much corrupted the Police is. Both refused to investigate a ( mr ) Crook whom broke the Law, and the Director whom signed that broken law apparently is not even (mr) Worth it of a prosecution. What to add to that? Encore une foi : Absolute 💩 No much to talk about it because whatever shape or form 💩 is 💩. LGSCO has to be the worst between these Ombudsmans and clearly is the mistress of the Councils. 50 yrs old reduced to sell itself for pennies. Used and Abused for free.
An O instead of the G and losco.
Italian for Sinister Shady Disreputable. How appropriate.
To you all, i feel you. Stay safe we'll be alright.

Contacted LGO after dealing with the council who were evasive. LGO ruled completely against me and came out with statutory information which was inaccurate. LGO told me that I can do a judicial review which will cost thousands of pounds which is unhelpful to put it mildly. They blamed everything on a contractor and told me that it’s nothing to do with them even though they employ the contractor. Complete waste of time for such a long drawn out process, it gave me a headache.

More red tape than a John Lewis haberdashery department

I Recently found out that The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is a BIASED AND RACIST ORGANISATIONS Operating under the PRETENSE of being impartial and fair. The money that the Government WASTE ON THESE TYPE OF NON PRODUCTIVE ORGANISATIONS COULD BE USE TO IMPROVE POOR CONDITIONS IN SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS.

The Investigator contacted LEWISHAM COUNCIL FOR INFORMATION REGARDING MY CASE THAT HAS BEEN WAITING ON ALLOCATION FOR MONTHS. A few days later he clearly took BRIBE from Lewisham Council to Close my Case without Valid REASON or even contacting me to discuss why he wasn’t able to investigate.
The reason the Investigator decided to close the Case without even contacting me is because he knew from the documents received from Lewisham council that there’s a good prospect of finding multiple Failings on Lewisham path and because the previous complaint found multiple failing without appropriate redress, it would really show up Lewisham Council incompetence and how they are failing Vulnerable Adults and Children. This service needs to be abolished/ scrapped as it’s an absolute sham and a waste of taxpayer money.