Industry News | Sep 26, 2026 | 9 Comments |
Annual review of complaints
Annual review of social care complaints by LGSCO
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) has revealed that complaints about adult social care have increased by more than a fifth.
Within that figure, complaints about privately funded care went up by 10%, as more people understand their right to complain – but it is still a low number given the amount of care arranged by individuals outside the public sector.
Annual Review of Adult Social Care Complaints 2025-26
The LGSCO received 3,938 complaints and enquiries about adult social care in general in 2025-26, up from the previous year.
In the independent sector, complaints from people who fund their own care also rose by 10% to 368. The Ombudsman said this reflects a welcome increase in public awareness of the right to complain, though it remains concerned that too few people who fund their own care come forward given the scale of privately arranged care across the country.
Three-quarters of complaints upheld
Of the 904 cases investigated, 77% were upheld. The high rate of compliance with Ombudsman recommendations was maintained, with 99.8% of cases being completed to the Ombudsman’s satisfaction.
Positively, around a third (33%) of upheld complaints about private social care providers had already been suitably remedied by the organisation before the Ombudsman investigated, a 13-percentage-point rise on the previous year.
Ms Amerdeep Somal, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, said:
“We are seeing welcome signs of improvement in how councils and care providers handle complaints, but there is still more to be done. My message to the sector is simple: use the learning in this report to improve services now, rather than waiting for wider changes to the care system that are currently under discussion.
“Councils should ensure the care providers they commission have current policies in place that reflect best practice, including clear signposting to us as the final step in the complaints process.
“And for care providers, dealing with complaints properly isn’t just the right thing to do, it i fundamental to fostering excellent relations with your clients, families, and the wider communities in which you operate. Handling a complaint well protects your reputation, and where you have already investigated and appropriately remedied an issue, this can mean a full Ombudsman investigation isn’t needed.
“Behind every one of these numbers is a person, a family or a carer trying to get things back on track after something has gone wrong. Getting the fundamentals right: clear records, honest explanations and proper signposting to our service, protects everyone: the people who rely on care, and the organisations providing it.”
You can download the full report here (external link will open in a new browser tab or window)
LGSCO interactive map of complaints
The LGSCO is one of the only Ombudsman schemes that publishes every decision made, in order to improve transparency and help share the learning.
Every year the information it sends to individual councils is made public. This annual summary is the number of complaints and enquiries it has received about the council, and the decisions made about those complaints.
It has an interactive map which enables people to see how their local authority is performing at the click of a button.
It is the first Ombudsman scheme in the UK to present data in this way. The map gives details of complaints received and investigated; how often councils have complied with recommendations; the improvements they have agreed to implement; and published decisions – all in one place.
You can explore the interactive map on their website (external link will open in a new browser window)
Article ends – click to return to top or check out related resources below
Further reading and resources
You can read more about the work of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman here
Councils aren’t learning from complaints as they should
Most local authorities don’t make it easy for people to appeal about social care decisions
There are few sanctions open to the Ombudsman if providers don’t follow their recommendations.
There is a different ombudsman service for complaints about the NHS
return to top
9 Replies to “Annual review of complaints”
Leave a Comment or Ask a Question:
You are providing your name and email address to Independent Living, so that we can communicate with you, if necessary, about your comment. Your privacy is very important, so please note that we won’t contact you for any other purpose, and your details will not be shared with any third party.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
I quickly realised that complaining was a waste of time, l will not go into the corrupt LA,s and ICB boards, instead of being constantly ignored, l have collected evidence of the maladministrations of both these Authorities for12 years, and not paid any care fees, l have actually told them to take me to court but they refuse to do it.
I hae 36 long-term illnesses and commobiditys and should be on Continuing healthcare.
I will be 80 in December, l am so glad that l dont have Dementia, for the unfortunate persons that have Dementiaare unable to stop these Authorities walking right over them.
Michael King says our voice matters, but when I emailed him he did not respond. There was no official contact email for him or any higher management on the LG&SC Ombudsman website. The way our complaints were handled was a complete farce, a waste of time, and effort. Please see the TrustPilot reviews of both the LG&SC Ombudsman and Housing Ombudsman. Both biased and useless, as they did not look at the timeline of evidence of what happened, had too narrow a focus, took months to get started, and did not look at several obvious incidences of disability discrimination at all. They preferred to go along with the completely irrelevant (given what the local council did) red-herring re-quotes of the local council of law which did not apply to the situation.
One particular section of ‘social care’ is the long-ignored issue of half-shared ownerships. This means that, as the years go by and at eighty-five today, I am now paying from my pension some £840.00 per month for service charges and rent. In addition, I paid over five years ago £235,000 pounds as a ‘premium’ payment, whatever that is. The rent goes up every year by a little under £400.00 whilst, with utility and other costs I now have to find £1100 from my pension. In addition, I had to attend a disgraceful internal policy view group by BPHA where I was completely unrepresented. The Ombudsman had little or no sympathy for my claim to transfer to affordable housing and would not, neither would the BPHA, discuss what the four central issues they themselves identified were. Whilst at least a dozen arguments were also ignored and in the end, as I was handling the issues myself which took well over a year, I simply gave up totally exchausted.,
As above and dow eighty-six and with utility prices et al I now have to find some £1300 out of
my pension each month. Even with a new director there has been no reply to a complaint of more than six month
I made a complaint to the LGSCO last year about privately arranged care in a private care home. My complaint, about falls which ultimately led to the death of my relation, was upheld. Basic safety measures had not been followed and this was acknowledged in their final decision. However the LGSCO would not investigate until I had first pursued the matter with the provider and not had satisfaction. The CQC gave me the impression they were not impartial. The home had been inspected and its rating raised to Good only 4 weeks before the falls. I felt the CQC were more concerned with defending their decision to increase the rating than confirming obvious failings. It took 18 months for the LGSCO to reach their decision and in that time I don’t know whether any of those failings were fully addressed. How can anyone have faith in a system where serious failings identified by the Ombudsman are not even acknowledged by the CQC and it takes 18 months to reach a decision?
The BIG PROBLEM for the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is that Ombudsmen have, in legal terms, NO TEETH. Ombudsmen can only advise and make recommendations. The lack of legal power leads people to think there is no point in complaining. When the Equality and Human Rights Commission dropped the case against the DWP regarding suicides, disabled people justifiably said, “What’s the point in complaining when the organisations that disabled people think should be supporting them actually do not.”
I have campaigned for access and equality for 20 years. In my home town 99% of cases I instigate fail. I have a Civic Hall with a 30º fire exit, disabled toilets in a new build that are too small for most disabled people and paving stones that have been tripping up elderly people for 20 years. I do what I can but despite all the legislation I am unable to affect any significant change.
You make an important point, Clive: The ombudsman service depends on people taking up their recommendations, they don’t have any powers to force them, other than naming and shaming – which they do occasionally.
I’m impressed that you continue fighting the good fight, despite a depressing hit rate. Long may you continue, and I hope the outcomes improve.
Good luck and best wishes,
Frances
While it seems councils generally comply with O’s recommendations, Clive makes the significant point that people may not complain *thinking* that it will or may be inefficacious. That complaining is in fact worthwhile – ie, it usually results in change – would not be apparent to potential complainants unaware of outcome record (and why would they necessarily be?)
Thus I agree that the O should probably have enforcement power (and wonder why this isn’t the case). After all, taxpayers are funding the service, thus would get better value if it had ‘teeth’.
While I haven’t complained to the O, my experience of my parents’ council in dealing with Disabled Facilities Grants has been one of inefficiency (rather than mere severe delay – but that too); and latterly that also applies to needs and carer’s assessments, which resulted in poor and no outcome respectively.
I would add that the number of times civil servants have rationalised reduced/poor service as ‘working from home’ seems to put lie to the claim that WFH does not reduce performance! If (some) front-line staff are acknowledging it does, that should be enough…
In my experience the CQC, although in theory have the teeth, don’t seem willing to bite! I identified numerous failings in a private care home after a relative suffered serious injury, but the CQC bent over backwards to avoid taking any action. Ultimately I complained to the Ombudsman who upheld my complaint. But 18 months elapsed between the event and their report. Whilst the Ombudsman was quick to grasp the situation and observe the shortcomings I felt it was a total waste of time even contacting the CQC, they were surprisingly ineffective.