LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because the complaint is late.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s complaints of noise nuisance. This is because past events fall outside our jurisdiction due to the passage of time and there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation in relation to more recent events.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about parking charges as there is insufficient injustice caused to the complainant to warrant our further involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about business rates liability as the matter has been resolved.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the handling of his planning application. This is because the injustice he claims stems from the decision to refuse his application and we cannot decide if this was correct. If Mr X had felt the decision was wrong it would have been reasonable for him to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council granting planning permission to his neighbour in 2021. The complaint is late and there is no good reason to investigate it now. Even if we had investigated, it is unlikely we would have found Council fault and we also could not have achieved the outcome Mr X wants.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about what happened when he made request for information under the Freedom of Information Act. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The substantive matter is better dealt with by the Information Commissioner's Office. And it is not a good use of public money for the Ombudsman to consider the side issues when we are not investigating the main complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint, brought by Mr Y, about the Council’s delay in deciding and its refusal of a planning application, and its responses to his complaint. As the applicant, Mr Y had rights of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate for non-determination of the application and against the Council’s refusal of the permission, appeals which were not unreasonable for him to have used.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about tree roots allegedly causing damage to a pavement used by the complainant to access his home. This is because the pavement has recently received maintenance work and there is insufficient evidence of its condition causing a significant injustice to the complainant. Though there may have been a problem prior to the pavement being maintained, there is currently no worthwhile outcome we could achieve by investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s lack of action on reports of anti-social behaviour and noise. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the reports. It is open for the complainant to report any new instances of noise or other anti-social behaviour for the Council to consider.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to investigate a complaint that a parish councillor breached the code of conduct. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. We have seen no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: Mrs X reported a breach of planning control and noise nuisance from a site near her home. We found no fault in how the Council reached its planning and noise nuisance decisions. The Council had already apologised to Mrs X for injustice caused by poor communication during its enforcement investigations and consideration of her complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant is not eligible for the £150 energy rebate. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council investigated a breach of licencing conditions at a boarding kennel. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: A homeowner complained the Council cut back her hedge without her permission. But we cannot investigate this matter because the law prevents us from considering complaints about what councils do when they are acting in their role as social housing landlords.

Summary: The Council is at fault for failing to complete works to an overgrown tree despite promising to Mr X on at least two occasions it would cut it back. Mr X has been put to significant time and trouble in pursuing the matter for over two years. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X, make a payment for the time and trouble and also to complete the works to the tree as it said it would.

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s response when she became homeless because of domestic abuse. We found fault with the Council. This caused Miss X distress and financial hardship. The Council agreed actions to remedy the injustice to Miss X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax liability because it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a planning enforcement matter. This is because the Council has not completed its enforcement investigation yet. This means it is too early for us to consider this complaint in detail.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to consult regarding his neighbour’s planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence to show the Council’s fault caused Mr X significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council’s planning enforcement team is harassing the complainant. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner and to use/have used the alternative remedy available to him. There is also not enough evidence of fault causing injustice in relation to the Council’s recent enforcement investigations.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing the complainant with a penalty charge notice. This is because the law provides a right of appeal against the penalty charge notice and it would have been reasonable to expect her to use that right.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to take reasonable steps to investigate her complaint about statutory noise nuisance from a nearby industrial site. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council’s decision about statutory noise nuisance.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to take reasonable steps to investigate his complaint about statutory noise nuisance. Mr X says the noise nuisance caused distress and damage to mental health. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council.

Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015