LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to withdraw the home to school transport previously provided to her child, Y. We have ended our investigation in relation to the Council’s decision to withdraw Y’s home to school transport because the Council will consider this complaint through stage 2 of its complaints process first. The Council was at fault when it wrongly referred Mrs X to the Ombudsman when it should have followed its complaints process. This caused Mrs X avoidable time and trouble. The Council will apologise, pay Mrs X a symbolic payment and investigate and respond t

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s highways officer’s consultee comments on his withdrawn planning application, or how the Council responded to his complaint.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not implement a tribunal order in accordance with the statutory timescales and failed to provide all the provision set out in Section F of her child, Y’s, final amended Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. The Council was at fault with delay in issuing Y’s EHC Plan after the tribunal order, it was unclear about Y’s specialist provision and delayed putting in place all Y’s Section F provision and failed to monitor the provision. This caused Mrs X frustration, confusion, avoidable time and trouble and uncertainty and Y missed some education to which th

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of its rented property next door to the complainant’s. We cannot investigate complaints about the management of housing by social housing landlords.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council charging a council tax premium for second homes. This is because the law says such decisions can only be challenged by judicial review.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice for a parking contravention as it is reasonable to expect the complainant to appeal it to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Summary: Mrs D complained on behalf of her daughter that, due to a lack of home to school transport, the Council failed to secure the special educational needs provision set out in her education, health and care plan. The Council has accepted fault. It has agreed to make payments to Miss B and Mrs D to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: Miss E complained about the Council’s operation of its allocations policy. I have discontinued my investigation, as Miss E has an alternative remedy available to her.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a road closure as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council.

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

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not investigating the condition of some listed buildings, and not processing his complaint. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to warrant us investigating. There is insufficient significant personal injustice to Mr X to justify an investigation. We do not investigate council complaint-handling where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a charity’s treatment of his late father. This is because the charity was not carrying out any administrative functions on behalf of the Council and it is not itself a body within our jurisdiction. Its actions are not therefore subject to investigation by the Ombudsman. We could not achieve any worthwhile outcome by investigating the way the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint as it is not responsible for the actions complained about.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide her child, Y, with suitable Education other than at School and the provision set out in their Education, Health and Care Plan. She also complained the Council delayed in making personal transport budget and free school meal payments. The Council delayed in issuing Y’s amended Plan causing Y to miss out on their special educational needs provision. It also delayed making transport and free school meals payments to Miss X. The Council has apologised and offered Miss X a payment to recognise the impact of these faults on Y. We are satisfied

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s allegations the Council has acted fraudulently and unlawfully in relation to his deceased mother-in-law’s care costs. This is because such complaints fall outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to take adequate action when she raised concerns about her late mother’s health and living conditions despite having knowledge of her history of mental health problems and hoarding behaviours. We found no grounds to criticise the Council’s actions. However, it was at fault in that it delayed in responding to Mrs X’s complaint. The Council has provided a satisfactory remedy for the injustice caused by this.

Summary: Mr C complains about the care provided at a care home and says the care home failed to follow the family’s request that Mr D should not be taken to hospital. There was fault in the care that was provided, the record keeping and the communication of the care home and this has caused an injustice to Mr D and his wife. The Council has agreed to apologise, to pay a small financial remedy and to implement service improvements.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to properly consider her application for a blue badge under the hidden disabilities criteria including referral to an expert assessor. She says she feels discriminated against because her disabilities are invisible. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council considered Miss X’s application for a blue badge.

Summary: There is no fault in how the Council has decided that it has no duty to stop Mr X’s foul water system backing up following heavy rainfall. The Council has properly investigated the site and considered all the available information before making its decision. There was fault by the Council when it failed to respond to Mr X’s enquiries about this. It should apologise to Mr X and share this statement with staff.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to concerns raised by Mr X in connection with a leisure centre car park and play area. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr X to warrant an investigation.

Mrs Y experienced poor care in a care home acting on behalf of the Council. A safeguarding investigation into this was insufficient and failed to acknowledge the impact the poor care had on Mrs Y’s wellbeing.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council did not tell the family about the cost of his father, Mr Y’s respite care because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered a planning application for a building. There is not a significant enough injustice to Mr X to warrant investigation.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her child’s school because the Ombudsman does not have powers to look at complaints about schools.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care planning. We are satisfied with the Council’s actions to accept fault and learn from the complaint. It is unlikely we would add to the Council’s investigation or achieve a different outcome.

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