LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council gave him inaccurate information, before moving to his new address, that he would be entitled to a parking permit. We cannot obtain the outcome Mr X seeks. It is reasonable for Mr X to pursue his legal remedy at court if he wishes to claim that he replied on the Council’s bad advice to his detriment.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to approve her application to move into a home fit for her disabled child Y’s needs. Ms X also complained the Council did not respond to the complaint she raised about this. The Council was not at fault for rejecting Ms X’s bid for the property. The Council was at fault for a significant delay in responding to the complaint she made. The Council should apologise to Ms X and make a payment of £200. It has already reminded its staff of the importance of responding to complaints within the required timescales.

Summary: We found fault with the Council’s handling of home to school transport arrangements for Ms X’s granddaughter, Y. The Council failed to ensure Y could use the transport she was eligible for free of charge. It will apologise to Ms X and reimburse the money she paid towards Y’s school transport. It will also review its approach to home to school transport for eligible looked after children and reimburse other connected and foster carers who made claims for transport expenses and had money deducted before their claim was paid. There was no fault in the Council’s handling of a home visit i

Summary: There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision not to award another Blue Badge to Ms X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s approach to mask wearing when its environmental health officers visit members of the public. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint about loading restrictions as he is not caused a significant injustice from this.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant cannot have a dropped kerb. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to take planning enforcement action against a neighbour. We will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council and the matter has not been determined yet and so any injustice is speculative.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered a Councillor’s conduct. That is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant further investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discharge its homeless duty to Mr X. It was reasonable for him to seek a review of the decision which he has now submitted.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to consult him about his neighbour’s planning application. This is because the complaint is late and I have seen no good reasons to exercise our discretion to investigate it.

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

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning matter. There is no evidence of fault by the Council and its actions did not cause of the injustice Mr X claims.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a building control matter. This is because we could not achieve the outcome the complainant wants.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the complainant has been affected by decisions the Council has taken regarding two adults she cared for. This is because the complaint is late and the complainant has not provided good reasons why she did not complain to us within 12 months of knowing about the matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse the complainant’s planning application or how it dealt with the complainant’s neighbour’s applications. This is because the complainant could have appealed to the Planning Inspectorate. It is unlikely we would find fault in relation to the remaining issues complained about.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failure to address concerns about his neighbour’s development. He said it did not comply with building regulations or its planning permission and created a potential risk of fire and water damage to his property. We do not find the Council was at fault because it considered Mr X’s concerns but reached a different conclusion to him about the development’s compliance with building regulations and planning permission.

Summary: Ms T complains on behalf of Miss X about how the Council wrongly completed Miss X’s financial reassessment and miscalculated her domiciliary care fees. There was fault by the Council in how it completed a financial reassessment for Miss X. The Council was also at fault when it continued to pay into Miss X’s direct payment account despite Miss X telling it she was not using the care services. This has caused Miss X significant distress and inconvenience. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a request for additional parking regulations. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decisions on planning applications. We will not investigate this complaint because she has used her right of appeal to a Planning Inspector (and can continue to do so).