LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a 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 position relating to the lawfulness of a vehicle crossover. There is insufficient evidence of fault and it is unlikely an investigation would reach a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered Ms X’s housing priority. There is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of Mr X’s housing request. This is because the complaint is about events that took place more than 12 months ago. There is no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate now.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Fixed Penalty Notice for littering. This is because Miss X can raise a defence against the issuing of the notice in court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council considered the conduct of two councillors. This is because we are unlikely to find enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered Mr X’s homelessness application. Mr X had the right to seek a review of homelessness decisions, and then to appeal to the county court on a point of law. We consider it reasonable for him to have used this right. We will not investigate the rest of Mr X’s complaint about accommodation offered to him under the Council’s social housing allocation scheme. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council, or a significant enough injustice, to justify an investigation.

Summary: Mx Y complained about the Council’s response to reports of anti-social behaviour they made it aware of. We upheld the complaint, finding the Council communicated poorly with Mx Y and failed to ensure meetings it arranged focused on the behaviour Mx Y reported. These faults caused Mx Y an injustice, as avoidable distress. The Council has accepted these findings. At the end of this statement we set out action it has agreed to take to remedy Mx Y’s injustice and improve its service to avoid a repeat of the faults.

Summary: Ms B complained that the Council had delayed excessively in completing the investigation of her complaint at stage two of the statutory children’s complaints procedure. This has caused her frustration and distress. We found the Council had delayed well outside the statutory time limits. The Council has agreed to complete the stage two investigation, apologise to Ms B and pay her £350. It has already taken action to speed up the process.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s personal data. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to investigate this complaint.

Summary: Miss X complained about the housing support the Council has provided since it discharged its homelessness duty in 2021. We found the delays in accepting a homeless application and a duty to assist Miss X is fault. As were the delays in responding to Miss X’s concerns about sewage and the water supply to her property. These faults caused Miss X an injustice.

Summary: Mr H complained the Council has taken control of a car he bought, for an unpaid fine the seller had not paid. We found the Council is not at fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax liability as there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal. The complaint is also out of time. Part of the complaint is also for the Information Commissioner and Housing Ombudsman.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about noise nuisance from a building site in the Council’s area between August 2021 and December 2021. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault for part of the complaint, and because there is no meaningful outcome achievable for the remainder.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. It is reasonable for Mr X to ask the Council to carry out a review of its decision that he is not eligible to be on the housing register.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the location of a dockless bike bay and the Council’s actions in relation to this. This is

Summary: Mr D complained the Council left him in unsuitable temporary accommodation. I have found fault by the Council, it has agreed to pay Mr D £450 for the three months delay moving him to suitable temporary accommodation.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the suitability of temporary accommodation. Ms X used her right of appeal to the courts.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the conduct of a civil enforcement officer and the Council’s complaint handling. This is because there is insufficient personal injustice caused to warrant us investigating further.

Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about damage to the complainant’s property due to a leak caused from the Council’s property above. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Ms X could not have complained to us sooner. We cannot determine claims about damage to property or personal injury. Only insurers or the courts can decide private negligence claims.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a fixed penalty notice issued by the Council. This is because it primarily concerns Mr X’s liability for the notice and this is a matter for the courts rather than the Ombudsman.

Summary: Mr X complained about the support and accommodation the Council provided him with while he was homeless. There was no fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: Mrs D complained the Council failed to assess her household’s medical need in line with procedures. I have upheld the complaint, the Council accepts there was delay and that it failed to take account of all the medical evidence. I have completed the investigation because the Council has offered to pay redress and carry out a new medical review.

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council caused a delay in responding to his complaint about its children’s social care service. We have discontinued our investigation, because there is no worthwhile outcome we can achieve until Mr X receives the Council’s final response to his complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council communicated with her. Any injustice to her is not significant enough to warrant investigation. Also, the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider her complaint about a potential data protection breach.