North East Scotland

Overview

The complainant (Mr C) was concerned that he had not been given help to redecorate his Housing Association owned flat, despite his disability and their policy that disabled tenants should be offered help.

Specific complaint and conclusion

The complaint from Mr C which I have investigated is that Mr C was not given help with redecoration costs to which he was entitled as a result of his disability (partially upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Housing Association:

• (i) apologise to Mr C for failing to inform him that he may have been able to ask for the Housing Association to carry out the decoration works required in the bathroom, for which he had been given a decoration allowance; and
• (ii) ensure tenants in receipt of a decoration allowance are aware that there may be additional help available with undertaking the decoration itself.

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

Overview

The complainant (Ms C) raised a number of issues concerning the treatment her father (Mr A) received prior to and following an operation.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are:

• (a) that staff failed to fully establish Mr A's current medical condition prior to surgery (partially upheld); and
• (b) inappropriate discharge (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman recommends that the Board remind staff of the importance of recording appropriate information.

The Board have accepted the recommendation made in this report.

Overview

The complainant (Ms C) raised a number of concerns regarding the treatment and care her late father (Mr A) received at the Victoria Infirmary, Glasgow.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a) inadequate supervision led to Mr A suffering a fall (not upheld);
• (b) inappropriate action was taken following an infection outbreak (not upheld); and
• (c) there was inadequate analgesia (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

Overview

The complainant was dissatisfied with the Appeal Board’s decision not to uphold his appeal against the level of award granted upon completion of a post graduate qualification. The complaint was that the Appeal Board had failed to consider all relevant factors affecting the complainant’s academic performance.

Specific complaint and conclusion

The complaint which has been investigated is the Handling of Appeal (not upheld).

Recommendation

The Ombudsman has no recommendation to make.

Overview

The complainant (Miss C)raised two specific concerns regarding the conduct and recording of business at the 2004 and 2005 annual general meetings of Partick Housing Association Ltd (the Association).

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  the minute of the Association's 2004 annual general meeting was inaccurate (upheld); and
• (b)  the Chair of the Association had failed to give an assurance that the minute of the 2005 annual general meeting would record her representations (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Association takes steps to publicise to their shareholders the principles of their minute-taking at annual general meetings.  The Association informed the Ombudsman that they were willing to accept the recommendation.

Overview

The complainant raised concerns about the complaints procedure and the way in which his complaint was investigated.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  Mr C’s complaint was not properly investigated (not upheld); and
• (b)  the University’s complaints procedure is inadequate (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman has no recommendation to make.

Overview

The complainant's father suffered profuse haemorrhaging after an endoscopy.  His son raised concerns about whether the procedure was conducted with a reasonable degree of care.

Specific complaint and conclusion

The endoscopy was not carried out with a reasonable degree of care and caused a haemorrhage (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman has no recommendation to make.

The complainant (Mr C) raised a number of concerns regarding the costs in remittance invoices of landscaping works, mistakes in invoices and the quality of information supplied by Thenew Housing Association (the Association).

Overview

There were concerns that the complainant's 88-year-old father was not properly monitored by his GP Practice in the months following his commencement of a diuretic medication, that this caused him to be hospitalised and that the Practice sent him to a community, instead of an acute, hospital.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated relate to:

• (a)  the Practice's monitoring between August 2004 and January 2005 (not upheld); and
• (b)  the timing of the hospital referral and the choice of hospital (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

The complainant raised a number of issues about the care and treatment she received from her GP Practice and her removal from the Practice list.