LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about contributions to the cost of adult social care and feeling threatened by the Council. It is unlikely an Ombudsman investigation would find any significant fault by the Council. It is unlikely we would add to the Council’s investigation or reach a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action against breaches of planning control and for failing to keep the complainant updated. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision not to take enforcement action. And we do not consider the failure to update the complainant caused a significant personal injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council revoked his high need banding for housing.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council took too long to put his support in place and started charging him for his support long before he received it. The delay in arranging Mr X’s support and charging him for it before it started caused avoidable distress to Mr X. The Council needs to apologise for these faults and pay financial redress.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council responded to reports of anti-social behaviour. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council made reasonable adjustments when communicating with her. There was fault in how the Council considered Miss X’s requests for reasonable adjustments and how it considered her complaint about this. The Council agreed to confirm what adjustments it considers reasonable, apologise to Miss X, pay her a financial remedy and share our decision with relevant staff.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint. Mr X could reasonably appeal, or have appealed, to the Valuation Tribunal about council tax decisions. Part of the complaint is late without good enough reason to investigate it now. It is not proportionate to investigate the alleged discrimination on its own.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the actions of the coroner’s office. We do not have the power to investigate the actions of the coroner or the coroner’s office which completes administrative tasks on the coroner’s behalf.

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

Summary: The complaint is about a home care provider commissioned by a council. Record keeping was poor around call timing and duration and there was a failure to discuss an informal carer’s expectations and preferences around delivering personal care. This caused avoidable distress and confusion. The Council will apologise and reduce the outstanding bill.

Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s administration of a home improvement grant in 2022. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about benefits. As Mr X has appealed to tribunals, we cannot consider how much housing benefit and council tax reduction he should receive. It is more appropriate for the courts to decide whether Mr X should receive compensation. Other points seem peripheral without good enough reason for us to investigate them.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s reports of vehicles blocking her property and noise nuisance from vehicles from a nearby business. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s children’s services prior to some of the complainants’ children being taken into care. This is because we cannot investigation complaints about matters that either were or could have been discussed in court.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has failed to meet the need for respite breaks since the start of 2022, when it agreed to fund 28 overnight respite breaks a year. The Council has been at fault over its planning for overnight respite for Mrs X’s son. There has also been service failure over the failure to provide all his planned respite breaks in 2022 and 2023. The Council needs to apologise and make a symbolic payment to the family for the additional pressures it has put upon them.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr & Mrs X’s council tax account as the Council has offered a suitable remedy and we cannot add to it.

Summary: There was no fault in the way the Council considered Mrs X’s request for increased care hours. Therefore, the Ombudsman cannot question the merits of its decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to make Mr X’s child subject to a child protection plan and the Council’s safeguarding involvement with Mr X’s family. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s priority on the Council’s housing register. We would be unlikely to reach a clear enough view now about some events in 2020. On other points there is not enough evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s safeguarding involvement with Miss X and her family. This is because the complaint relates to events that took place more than 12 months ago and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate them now.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant’s neighbours have not breached planning control. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

Summary: Mr P complained the Council failed to take his mother, Mrs R’s, finances into account when completing a financial assessment for his father, Mr R. He also complained the Council’s complaint handling has been poor. We have found the Council at fault for not considering Mr R’s continuing property costs and for the delay in providing Mr P with the outcome of his appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about child protection action by the Council. There is not enough evidence of fault causing injustice by the Council to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that Mr X only has a one-bedroom need. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: Mr X complained about the outcome of his school admissions appeal. He said the panel failed to properly consider his daughter, F’s medical issues. There was no fault in how the panel decided to refuse Mr X’s appeal. However, its decision letter to Mr X failed to explain the panel’s reasons which was fault. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X for the uncertainty that caused and carry out a service improvement.