LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement in the care of Mrs X’s child. Most of the complaint relates to matters considered in court, which the law prevents us from investigating. Events before May 2024 are late. There is insufficient evidence of fault in more recent events we could consider, and in any event we could not achieve the outcome Mrs X seeks.

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council handled her case when her children were taken away from her. The issues raised relate to what happened in court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled his application to join the housing register. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to maintain or cut back trees which are damaging Mrs X’s property. Mrs X can make can insurance claim. If an insurance claim is refused, the courts can decide whether the Council is liable for the damage and whether it should pay compensation.

Summary: Miss X complained that the Council delayed accepting a homelessness application referral. We found fault by the Council which caused Miss X avoidable distress and meant she lived in an unsuitable property for longer than necessary. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Miss X.

Summary: The complaint is the Council gave incorrect advice to Mr B which led to him agreeing to move his mother between nursing homes, on the understanding nothing would change in her care and support. But instead the Council carried out an assessment and Mr B’s mother was liable for her care costs. The Council then delayed responding to his complaint and said it had sent a response when it had not. The Ombudsman’s decision is there is no documentary evidence of the Council’s involvement in the move or in giving the family any advice. There was some delay in its carrying out an assessment and

Summary: We have found fault with the Council for failing to secure alternative provision for Mrs X’s son, Y for a term. This caused Y the injustice of missing a term of education. The Council has agreed to apologise and make Mrs X a symbolic payment to remedy this injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to remove a tree nearby his property. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons why he did not complain sooner.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We found fault on Mr Y’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with his reports of a neighbouring business site breaching planning regulations. It could not provide copies of correspondence with the site. Nor did it show what it was doing for eight months in 2024. It failed to keep him updated at key stages. The Council agreed to send him a written apology, pay £150 for the injustice caused, remind relevant officers of the need to properly keep records, and to keep reporters updated at key moments of their investigation. It will ensure cases are progressed without delay, keep Mr Y

Summary: The Council was at fault because it delayed processing a review of its decision to refuse the complainant a place on the housing register. This did not make a difference to the outcome of its eventual decision, but the Council has agreed to formally apologise and offer the complainant a financial remedy to reflect her distress. There was no fault in the way the Council subsequently decided to refuse the review.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about exemption from Council tax because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an application for priority housing on medical grounds as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response after Mr X reported disrepair and hazards at the property he rents. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to notify Miss X before removing her single person discount and starting recovery action regarding an outstanding balance on her council tax account. This is because it would be reasonable for Miss X to refer her complaint to the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about planning advice. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint that the Council recorded inaccurate information in reports, which has affected the care arrangements of her children. This is because the reports have formed part of court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council considered her housing banding appeal. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about refuse collections. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a council tax reminder sent to Mr X in error. This is because the Council has already provided a satisfactory remedy.

Summary: Mr D complains the Council failed to fully consider relocating communal waste bins. I do not have contemporaneous evidence of how the Council assessed the site and considered Mr D’s request. I have upheld the complaint and asked the Council to carry out a new assessment, which it should document, and share its decision with Mr D.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to provide an appropriate placement and specialist provision for his children Y and Z. The Council was at fault. It failed to secure the provision for Y and Z set out in their Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans and did not uphold Mr X’s complaint despite this. The Council has agreed to apologise and make payments to Mr X to acknowledge the frustration and lack of provision. It has also agreed to produce an action plan to address the shortage of special school provision in its area.

Summary: We cannot investigate a complaint about Mr X’s liability for business rates. This is because only a court can decide liability for business rates.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an incident involving a Council employee. An investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome.