On Friday 6 March, the High Court refused permission for the judicial review sought by the Charity Commission in relation to two investigations we completed in March 2024. PHSO investigated complaints about how the Commission handled concerns regarding serious safeguarding issues of sexual exploitation and child sex abuse at two separate charities.

Our investigations uncovered several failings, including around the Commission’s decision-making and its communication with the complainants, Mr Murray and Miss Hall. We recommended that the Commission apologise, provide financial redress to both complainants and take action to stop the same failures from being repeated. This included reviewing its handling of these two cases and the original decisions, as well as its risk assessment and communication guidance.  

In March 2025, after failing to reach agreement with the Commission on compliance with our recommendations, PHSO took the rare decision to lay the reports before Parliament so that Parliament could hold the Commission to account. The Commission issued legal proceedings to prevent the reports from being laid. Following a successful motion in the House of Commons, the reports were laid in September 2025. 

The Court recognised that our original findings identified failings with the Commission’s decision-making. It also acknowledged that our recommendation for the Commission to undertake a review of its decision was intended to remedy the injustice experienced by Mr Murray and Miss Hall. 

In our submission to the Court, we said that the Commission needed to take into account relevant considerations (which can include allegations of inappropriate behaviour) when making an assessment of risk in a safeguarding context.  The judgment was clear that a criminal conviction is not a necessary condition to disqualification or, therefore, to regulatory action by the Commission. The Judge accepted PHSO’s submissions and found the claim to be academic and legally unarguable.

In its judgment, the Court also made clear that the outcome of the Commission’s review of the handling of Miss Hall’s case needed to be communicated to her.  

The Court also recognised that PHSO’s role is to hold public bodies to account, including where organisations fail to comply with our recommendations. It confirmed that our decision to lay reports does not require a new complaint of maladministration in addition to the finding of failings as part of the original investigation.   

A PHSO spokesperson said: 

One of our roles is to hold public bodies to account, acting on behalf of Parliament. This is an important principle to uphold, and the Court’s decision supports that principle by refusing the Charity Commission's request for permission to judicially review. 

 

“Our reports were laid before Parliament after failing to reach agreement on compliance with the Charity Commission. 

 

“At the heart of what might seem like a matter of process are two people, Miss Hall and Mr Murray, who have suffered significant injustice. Securing resolution for the complainants remains the priority, alongside making sure the lessons identified in our investigations are implemented. 

 

 “While the Charity Commission has made some changes after our original reports, we hope the Commission will now focus on working constructively to fully comply with our recommendations and provide the assurance that the public are entitled to expect.” 

Read the full report here

This follow-up report shows that since our report in 2023 there has been progress in how the healthcare system provides information to patients on waiting lists.

Of the 34 recommendations we made, 32 have either been fully or partially met.

Key improvements include:

• a dedicated ‘Waiting Times’ website and a new mobile App allowing patients and carers to view personal medical records.
• new text and letter notification systems to provide regular status updates to patients and their carers
• a more transparent framework explaining exactly how trusts manage and prioritise their waiting lists
• the early development of a ‘support while waiting’ program, designed to help patients manage their physical and mental wellbeing while they are on a waiting list.

Read the report here.

Buckinghamshire brothers with special educational needs were left without the speech and language therapy they were legally entitled to for more than a year - because Buckinghamshire Council failed to make sure it was in place.

During an investigation by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman into the case, the Ombudsman found up to 400 other children were also potentially affected by delays.

In the siblings’ cases, one brother missed more than half the speech and language therapy, and almost all of the occupational therapy, which his Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan entitled him to between September 2023 and December 2024.

His brother also went without his speech and language therapy, and the council repeatedly delayed updating his plan, meaning his mother had no legal right to challenge the level of support he was getting.

The Ombudsman found the problems were partly due to the council's therapy provider ending its contract with a sub-contractor in early 2024 - potentially affecting nearly 400 children across Buckinghamshire.

The Ombudsman’s investigation found the council failed to properly consider the impact of withdrawing the contract, had no back-up plan, and failed to step in to ensure those children still got the help they were owed quickly enough.

Mrs Amerdeep Clarke, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, said:

"These are not simply cases of two children falling between the cracks of an overstretched service. Instead the council made wholescale changes to the way it provided support without ensuring it could meet the needs of these children and many others.

“Buckinghamshire Council did not do enough when it identified clear warning signs that the therapy hundreds of children and young people needed could not be delivered at the agreed level.

“Every child with an EHC Plan has a legal entitlement to the support set out in it. This case highlights what can go wrong when councils do not exercise sufficient oversight of the services they commission.

“When a provider struggles to meet demand, it is the council's responsibility to step in - not to wait and hope the situation improves.

“I welcome Buckinghamshire Council's agreement to make the service improvements I have recommended, and I hope this report serves as a reminder to councils across the country of their duties to children with SEND.”

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman remedies injustice and shares learning from investigations to help improve public, and adult social care, services. In this case the council has agreed to apologise to the boys’ mother and pay a symbolic £1,000 to recognise what has gone wrong.

The Ombudsman has the power to make recommendations to improve processes for the wider public. In this case the council has agreed to create a plan to show how it will address any shortfall in the needs of children and young people with EHC Plans whose needs are not currently being met through the therapy service.

It will also develop a protocol for cases where the therapy service cannot deliver provision in line with a child’s EHC plan.