LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Miss X complains about how the Council dealt with her homelessness application. The Council is at fault as it failed to provide proper advice to Miss X on benefits and storage, delayed in accepting the main housing duty and failed to notify Miss X of her right to seek a review of its decision that her temporary accommodation remained suitable. These faults caused uncertainty and distress to Miss X. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice by apologising to Miss X and making a payment of £150 to her which is in addition to a payment of £350 already offered by the Council. The Cou

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council will not contribute to the cost of felling a tree. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because we cannot determine land ownership disputes.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing to allow Miss X full council tax reduction from August 2020, failing to offer her financial compensation, and about poor complaint handling. This is because the alleged fault has not caused any significant injustice to Miss X. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: Mr D complains primarily about the Council’s consultation process regarding the removal of a market. The Ombudsman has discontinued the case because there is no significant personal injustice to Mr D.

Summary: The Council was at fault for not giving Miss X a right to review the suitability of her temporary accommodation. It was also at fault for not properly considering suitability considerations Miss X raised afterwards. It was at fault for delays in the time it took to deal with her complaints, and it has apologised. It was not at fault in how it assessed Miss X for her housing allocation banding and any fault in how it dealt with her homelessness application has not caused a significant injustice.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to approve his neighbour’s planning application in 2019. This complaint was brought to our attention late, outside our 12-month time limit, and we have seen no good reason to investigate it now.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that the Council has not provided documents she requested under the Freedom of Information Act. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs B to complain to the Information Commissioner, and if needed, put in an appeal to the tribunal for information rights.

Summary: Mr B complained the Council failed to address problems he was having with his neighbours. This included anti-social behaviour and potential statutory nuisances. He said this restricted his family’s use of their garden. The Council was at fault because it did not investigate Mr B’s reports of anti-social behaviour and potential statutory nuisances correctly. The Council will apologise to Mr B and provide staff training.

his planning enforcement cases in relation to a neighbouring site

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s planning process and decision to grant permission for a new heating system in a neighbouring Grade II Listed property. Even if there was fault which affected the Council’s planning decision, the outcome does not cause a significant enough personal injustice to Mr X to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions in holding properties liable for council tax because the matter affects all or most of the population of the area.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council have not adequately considered the medical evidence she provided in assessing her need for an extra bedroom for a carer. The Council suspended her Housing Needs Register Application and took over 11 months to respond to her stage two complaint. We do not find fault with the way the Council has made its housing decisions, but find fault with the Council for the delay in response. This caused Mrs X distress, frustration and added time and trouble pursuing the response and the Council has provided a remedy for this.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council’s decision to grant planning permission on a neighbouring property has resulted in a loss of privacy for him. Mr X also said he had no opportunity to make objections to the plans. We do not find fault with the way the Council notified Mr X of the planning application or decided to approve it.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to respond to the complainant’s concerns about her neighbour’s building work. The complaint is made too late, and we have seen no good reason to investigate now.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for two new houses close to her home. The Council considered the relevant legislation and the objections received and decided to approve the application. Without fault in the process, this is a decision the Council is entitled to make.

Summary: Miss B and Mr C complained the Council delayed investigating disrepair to their private rented property, failed to identify hazards and did not take enforcement action against their landlord. They also complained the Council did not follow its complaint procedure. Miss B and Mr C said this caused them disruption and inconvenience. The Council delayed seeking an update about an electrical safety test report and responding to Miss B and Mr C’s complaint. This caused Miss B and Mr C injustice. The Council will make a financial payment to remedy this.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about recycling containers and the way the Council responded to the complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council completed a building control enforcement investigation into a neighbouring property without considering the evidence he had on the building works. There was fault by the Council because it did not consider information from Mr X. I recommend the Council reopens its enforcement investigation to take account of the information Mr X has.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the use of technology in assessing charges in a car park. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council requiring Mr X to present his waste bin for collection at the end of a private track as there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to take enforcement action in respect of unauthorised development at a neighbouring property. Mr X says the structure is visually intrusive and any ongoing use has the potential to cause disturbance. As a retrospective planning application for the retention of the unauthorised structure is pending determination, it would not be a good use of public money to investigate this matter further at this time.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because the complainant has not been caused significant injustice.