New Customer Service Standards

We have updated our Customer Service Standards and are looking for feedback from customers. Please fill out our survey here by 12 May 2025: https://forms.office.com/e/ZDpjibqe8r 

Mid Scotland and Fife

  • Report no:
    200400549
  • Date:
    May 2007
  • Body:
    South Lanarkshire Council
  • Sector:
    Local Government

Overview

The complaint concerns damage to the living room wooden floor following water penetration during the course of renovation works.

Specific complaint and conclusion

The complaint which has been investigated is that the Council refused to replace a wooden floor that allegedly was damaged by water penetration into the living room, caused by Contractors acting on behalf of the Council in the course of a Capital Repairs Programme (upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman recommends that in order to restore Ms C's living room to the condition it was in before the flooding occurred, the Council makes arrangements to replace the wooden floor and at the same time fulfils their previous offer to Ms C, to replace the living room ceiling and decorate the room.

The Council have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

  • Report no:
    200600510
  • Date:
    March 2007
  • Body:
    Fife Council
  • Sector:
    Local Government

Overview

The complainant (Mrs C) raised concerns about the way new parking restrictions at a car park in Glenrothes were advertised.  She also complained that a request for information made on her behalf by her Councillor (the Councillor) was refused by Fife Council (the Council).

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

  • (a)      the Council did not adequately notify the public about the new parking restrictions (not upheld); and
  • (b)      the Council failed to respond to a request, made on Mrs C's behalf by her Councillor, for a copy of a worksheet showing when a permanent notice detailing the new parking restrictions was erected (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

  • Report no:
    200503208
  • Date:
    March 2007
  • Body:
    Lanarkshire NHS Board
  • Sector:
    Health

Overview

The complainant (Miss C) raised a number of concerns about the nursing care which her grandmother (Mrs A) received in Wishaw General Hospital (the Hospital), the nursing staff's management of her grandmother's diabetes, the communication between nursing staff and the Hospital Emergency Care Team (HECT), the communication between nursing staff and the family, the fact that information was missing from her grandmother's medical records and the fact that the wrong cause of death was recorded on her grandmother's death certificate.

The Board carried out an investigation into Mrs A's care and devised an action plan to remedy most of their failings, for which I commend them.  I have, however, upheld all of Miss C's complaints principally because the Board did not apologise to Mrs A's family for any of their failings.  An appropriate apology is an important part of remedying a failing and I am disappointed that the Board did not apologise despite recognising that aspects of Mrs A's care had been inadequate.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

  • (a)  nursing staff's communication with Miss C and her family about Mrs A's health was inadequate (upheld to the extent that no apology was given);
  • (b)  erroneous information was given to Miss C and her family about the cause of Mrs A's death and, additionally, that the wrong cause of death was recorded on Mrs A's death certificate (upheld);
  • (c)  nursing care and conduct were inadequate (upheld to the extent that no apology was given);
  • (d)  nursing staff failed to adequately manage Mrs A's diabetes (upheld to the extent that no apology was given);
  • (e)  nursing staff's communication with the HECT did not convey the urgency of Mrs A's situation (upheld); and
  • (f)  information was missing from medical records (upheld).

 Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Board:

  • (i)       issue an apology to Mrs A's family for staff's failure to adequately explain Mrs A's medical condition to them;
  • (ii)      apologise to Mrs A's family for the distress and inconvenience caused by the fact that they recorded the wrong cause of death on Mrs A's death certificate;
  • (iii)      take steps to ensure that the correct cause of death is recorded on a patient's death certificate;
  • (iv)      issue an apology to Mrs A's family for the poor standard of nursing care received by Mrs A in the Hospital;
  • (v)      apologise to Mrs A's family for their failure to adequately manage Mrs A's diabetes;
  • (vi)      apologise to Mrs A's family for nursing staff's failure to convey the urgency of Mrs A's condition to HECT;
  • (vii)     issue an apology to Mrs A's family for their failure to record all of the necessary information in Mrs A's medical records;
  • (viii)    remind relevant staff of the importance of recording important patient data accurately; and
  • (ix)      consider how best to improve communication between healthcare professionals, especially via the telephone.

The Board have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

  • Report no:
    200502954
  • Date:
    March 2007
  • Body:
    North Lanarkshire Council
  • Sector:
    Local Government

Overview

The complainant (Ms C) raised concerns about the problems she experienced in her previous home and afterwards, when she transferred to her current house and that North Lanarkshire Council failed to acknowledge their assurances that her Right to Buy discount would be unaffected.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints from Ms C which have been investigated are that:

  • (a)       the Council failed to acknowledge the dreadful living conditions she had to endure and the damage caused to her home (not upheld); and
  • (b)       the Council failed to acknowledge the assurances made to her that her Right to Buy discount would be unaffected (upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Council:

  • (i)        in the event of Ms C seeking to buy her house, allow her to do so on terms equivalent to those which would have applied had she retained her Right to Buy discount; and
  • (ii)       ensure that a process is in place to provide tenants with written advice, in advance of any new tenancy, of possible changes to their Right to Buy.
  • Report no:
    200502468
  • Date:
    March 2007
  • Body:
    North Lanarkshire Council
  • Sector:
    Local Government

Overview

The complainant (Mr C) raised a number of concerns about a fence which had been erected by North Lanarkshire Council to the rear of his property.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

  • (a)       the Council stated that the fence was necessary because of Mr C's family's anti-social behaviour despite the Police being unaware of any such issues.  Furthermore, the decision to put up the fence was made as a result of a complaint by only one neighbour (not upheld);
  • (b)       Mr C was not consulted before the fence was put up (not upheld); and
  • (c)       the erection of the steel fence at the rear of Mr C's property causes a nuisance to him and his family (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

  • Report no:
    200502216
  • Date:
    March 2007
  • Body:
    Forth Valley NHS Board
  • Sector:
    Health

Overview

The aggrieved (Mr C) raised a number of concerns through his Member of the Scottish Parliament (Mr A) about the treatment his wife received at Falkirk Royal Infirmary (the Hospital) during 2003 and the way his complaint was handled.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

  • (a)       the clinical treatment which Mrs C received was inadequate (not upheld); and
  • (b)       the tone of one of the Board's response letters to Mr A was inappropriate (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

 

  • Report no:
    200502100
  • Date:
    March 2007
  • Body:
    A Medical Practice, Forth Valley NHS Board
  • Sector:
    Health

Overview

The complainant (Mr C) raised concerns about the treatment received by his wife (Mrs C) at their medical practice (the Practice) during February and March 2005.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

  • (a) there was a delay in diagnosing that Mrs C was suffering from Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES) (not upheld); and
  • (b) the clinical records contained inaccurate information (partially upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Practice reminds the GPs concerned about the need to complete clinical records in accordance with guidance from the professional bodies.

The Practice have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

  • Report no:
    200502048
  • Date:
    March 2007
  • Body:
    North Lanarkshire Council
  • Sector:
    Local Government

Overview

Miss C complained of being given misinformation in regard to her rent account when she transferred to another Council house, and of problems in getting repairs carried out to the house.

Specific complaints and conclusion

The complaint which has been investigated concern:

  • (a) misinformation as to the date on which she was required to take entry and pay rent and council tax in respect of her new tenancy (upheld);*
  • (b) misinformation about the direct debit arrangements required for making payments to her rent and council tax account (upheld);
  • (c) failure by the Council adequately to carry out repairs and maintenance to her new home (upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman recommends that the Council:

  • (i) review their practices regarding changes of tenancy to ensure that correct information is given regarding transfer arrangements and rental charges; and
  • (ii) advise tenants of the priority code as well as the timescale within which their repairs are likely to be carried out.

The Council have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

* Please note that the Report incorrectly states on the summary page that this aspect of the complaint was not upheld.  It was upheld, and the SPSO has apologised to Miss C and to the Council for our typographical error.

  • Report no:
    200501334
  • Date:
    March 2007
  • Body:
    South Lanarkshire Council
  • Sector:
    Local Government

Overview

The complainants (Mr and Mrs C) raised seven issues relating to the handling of an application for planning permission for residential development in the steading where they reside.  They also complained about the failure of South Lanarkshire Council (the Council)'s failure to meet their targets in responding to their complaint.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

  • (a) the Council failed to spot errors by the applicant in his description of the proposals (not upheld);
  • (b) objectors were misled by officers that the application would be considered on its merits (not upheld);
  • (c) the report to committee on the application failed properly to assess and evaluate the proposals (not upheld);
  • (d) the report failed adequately to convey the unique situation of Mr and Mrs C and the impact on their human rights (not upheld);
  • (e) the report to committee showed bias and discriminated against Mr and Mrs C, failed adequately to represent their objections, and failed to challenge untruthful statements by the applicant (not upheld);
  • (f) Mr and Mrs C were not furnished with a copy of the report and were not informed they could approach a councillor to present their case (not upheld);
  • (g) as objectors, Mr and Mrs C were not afforded the opportunity to be heard by the committee (upheld); and
  • (h) the Council failed to meet their published targets in responding to Mr and Mrs C's complaint (upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Council apologise to Mr and Mrs C for the failings identified.  She recognises that The Planning Act (Scotland) 2006 will establish a new system of public engagement and consultation in the planning process and recommends that the Council in meeting their obligations take all necessary steps to ensure that objectors in sparsely populated areas are not discriminated against.

  • Report no:
    200501195
  • Date:
    March 2007
  • Body:
    Forth Valley NHS Board
  • Sector:
    Health

Overview

The complainant (Mrs C) raised a number of issues regarding her treatment and care following an operation for a vaginal prolapse.

Specific complaint(s) and conclusion(s)

The complaints which have been investigated are that the Board:

  • (a) failed to provide full information about the potential side-effects of the operationinadequate information about potential side-effects of operation (no finding);
  • (b) failed to provide adequate post-operative careinadequate post-operative care (not upheld);
  • (c) failed to communicate clearly information to Mrs C about her symptomsinadequate communication about Mrs C’s symptoms (not upheld); and
  • (d) failed to handle properly Mrs C's complaint (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman recommends that the Board ensure their health professionals are aware of good practice in obtaining consent.

The Board have accepted the recommendation and will act on it accordingly.