Le Médiateur, Marc BERTRAND, poursuit son programme de rencontre avec les nouveaux Ministres wallons et de la Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles.

29-11-2024

A Worcestershire child with significant and complex needs had to live in an unsuitable home for far longer than necessary because Bromsgrove and Worcestershire councils made a catalogue of errors when adapting a home to their needs.

The child and their family had been living in a home that did not meet their needs. Bromsgrove District Council accepted the family was therefore homeless and a property was found that could be adapted.

However, a Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s investigation has found work to adapt the property took longer than it should have done to complete. The home also needed significant further alterations because those that were done did not meet the child’s needs. Because of this, the child had to spend six weeks in respite care away from their family while the extra changes were made.

At the time the events took place, Bromsgrove District Council was the housing authority and a Worcestershire County Council-owned company called Worcestershire Children First delivered services for children in Worcestershire.

The catalogue of issues with the work, which was funded by the district and county councils, and the NHS, included a bedroom that was too small to accommodate access all the way around the child’s hospital bed, limited space for equipment and a failure to consider the child would need a bigger bed as they grew.

The councils spent too long deciding whether to extend the bedroom by taking space away from the kitchen, which would have meant the family had nowhere to sit together at mealtimes, instead of extending the property further.

And garden adaptations meant the child could only access a small patio, which was too small for their wheelchair to turn on as the rest of the garden was only accessible by steps.

Ms Amerdeep Somal, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, said:

“The councils focused too much on achieving adaptations that would fit within permitted development rights, rather than on providing a home that was suitable for the child’s needs. Because of this the child and their family spent far too long living in a place that was fundamentally not good enough.

“The councils did not include the mother in key discussions, and did not ensure she fully understood what was happening, and it’s certainly possible that the councils have now spent significantly more on changing the property following the initial works than they would have done had they got it right in the first place.

“When dealing with major schemes such as these, involving multiple different agencies, councils should provide a single point of contact for people to feed in their views and so that any concerns can be addressed at the earliest opportunity.

“I am pleased the councils agreed to my recommendations to put things right for the family, and to improve the way they work together on schemes to arrange major adaptations for people with disabilities.”

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 both councils have agreed to apologise to the mother. The district council has agreed to pay the mother £2,000 to distress and frustration caused by its delays and poor communication.

The county council has agreed to pay £4,000 to acknowledge the injustice caused by the failure to ensure the initial plans met her child’s needs.

In addition, both councils will share refunding the cost the mother paid for her private occupational therapy and architect reports, and will also pay £500 each to acknowledge the direct impact on the child of their failings.

The Ombudsman has the power to make recommendations to improve processes for the wider public. In this case the district council will review its procedures to ensure it communicates effectively with applicants so they understand what adaptations they are agreeing to and that any plans are agreed with the occupational therapist to ensure they meet the person’s needs.

The county council will produce a policy to require its occupational therapists to involve an applicant as early as possible in the adaptations process to ensure the recommendations made are appropriate to meet the assessed needs of the child.  

Article date: 05 December 2024

Summary of the decision: The Parliamentary Ombudsmen carried out a review on its own initiative into whether there is a legal basis for the military police to conduct or otherwise take part in criminal investigations. The principle of legality, according to which all exercise of public power must be based on a law or other regulation, requires there to be statutory grounds for this.

The Parliamentary Ombudsman’s conclusion is that there is no statutory basis for the military police to investigate criminal offences. Neither is there a basis for a military police officer to be considered to be a police officer for the purposes of criminal investigation provisions, for example, in the Code of Judicial Procedure. This means that a military police officer does not have the power to take investigative measures in a preliminary investigation.

The Parliamentary Ombudsman further notes that the Government regulates who is authorised to act as a police officer in an ordinance. In the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s view, provisions on who is authorised to be a police officer are of a nature that only the Parliament should be able to decide upon them. It should therefore be regulated directly by law. The Parliamentary Ombudsman is therefore raising the issue of such statutory regulation with the Government.

Il primo dei tre incontri di studio organizzati dal Difensore Civico della Regione Abruzzo Umberto Di Primio in collaborazione con l’Università degli Studi “Gabriele d’Annunzio” di Chieti-Pescara e l’Università di Teramo ha riscosso un grande successo. All’appuntamento, svolto il 4 dicembre presso l’Aula Multimediale del Rettorato dell’Università “Gabriele d’Annunzio” a Chieti, dal titolo La trasparenza e l’accesso agli atti, hanno partecipato il Prof. Stefano Civitarese Matteucci (Professore ordinario di diritto amministrativo e pubblico, Università degli Studi “Gabriele d’Annunzio” di Chieti-Pescara), il Difensore Civico regionale Umberto Di Primio , la Prof.ssa Melania D’Angelosante (Professore associato di diritto amministrativo e pubblico, Università “Gabriele d’Annunzio” di Chieti-Pescara), il Dott. Gianlorenzo Ioannides (PhD e Assegnista di ricerca di diritto amministrativo e pubblico, Università “Gabriele d’Annunzio” di Chieti-Pescara) e il Prof. Gianluca Bellomo (Professore associato di diritto amministrativo e pubblico, Università “Gabriele d’Annunzio” di Chieti-Pescara).

L’Avvocato Di Primio ha dichiarato: “È stata una giornata di lavoro molto proficua e per questo voglio ringraziare, per il supporto organizzativo e per i contributi di assoluto pregio portati dai proprio docenti, l'Università d’Annunzio di Chieti che, da subito, ha creduto in questa forma di comunicazione/formazione sottoscrivendo con noi un accordo di collaborazione. Un primo appuntamento più che positivo che ci incoraggia a proseguire il percorso intrapreso in vista del prossimo evento in programma il 12 dicembre a Teramo”.

The Public Defender and his representatives have been meeting with citizens detained and injured during the protests for the fifth day in a row. Most of the citizens indicate the harshest treatment by the police.

Most of them have serious injuries to the face, eyes, and head, which practically excludes the probability that the police each time used the necessary, proportionate force against them. The location, nature and degree of the injuries create a credible impression that the police are using violent methods against citizens for the purpose of punishment.

Intentional, severe violence for the purpose of punishment constitutes an act of torture.

At this time, we would like to provide the public with additional information about the individuals detained at the protests. As of now, the Office has visited a total of 201 people, including a 21-year-old young man in the Ingorokva University Clinic, whose serious health condition is being actively reported in the media.

Following the previous days, on December 1-3, representatives of the Office additionally visited 75 people held in temporary detention centers in Tbilisi, Bagdati, Gori and Zestaponi, as well as in clinics, 56 of whom indicated ill-treatment by members of the special forces (21 of them did not express a desire for a response to their case). 44 of the detainees had various types of injuries.

Unfortunately, the information provided regarding the circumstances of the detention does not differ from the practice observed in the previous days. It is noteworthy that in recent days, a number of detainees have indicated the facts of personal belongings being taken away after the detention.

The Public Defender's Office permanently provides the Special Investigation Service with information received from citizens and disseminated through the media on alleged ill-treatment for the purpose of further legal response. The Office will also respond appropriately to the cases of personal belongings and clothing being seized from the detained citizens.

The Public Defender's representatives are currently continuing their visits and will provide the public with additional information.

The Public Defender calls on the Minister of Internal Affairs to publicly condemn every case of violence by the police and to ensure that effective measures are taken to prevent any unlawful actions by police officers.