LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council failed to make reasonable adjustments for her. There is nothing worthwhile to be achieved through our investigation.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to provide her with the correct support when she left care. She said there were delays by the Council in investigating her complaint and its offer of a symbolic financial payment was not enough to remedy the injustice caused to her. We found the Council at fault for failing to provide an appropriate remedy to Ms X. This fault caused injustice to Ms X. The Council will make a higher payment to recognise Ms X’s distress.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax liability for Mr X’s late father’s property. It was, and still is, reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: Miss X complained that the Council delayed in issuing an amended Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for her child, sent an incorrect draft, and failed to provide agreed educational and therapeutic support while her child was out of school. Based on the current evidence, the Council was at fault. This caused avoidable distress to Miss X and a loss of provision for her child. We have proposed recommendations to the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to consider representations made to appeal a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). This is because the Council has now accepted Mrs X’s representations and cancelled the PCN, which achieves the outcome she was seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s concerns about antisocial behaviour and safeguarding. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: we will not investigate Mr F’s complaint the Council has dismissed his concerns about the impact of his ex-partner’s conduct on their child because there is nothing we could add to the Council’s response and nothing worthwhile we could achieve.

Summary: We have upheld Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in assessing her mother, Mrs Y’s, contribution towards her care costs. The Council has agreed to take appropriate steps to remedy the uncertainty caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council overcharging him for depositing his household waste at its recycling centre. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault and we could not add anything more to the Council’s investigation.

Summary: Miss D says the Council failed to properly inform her, and make reasonable adjustments, relating to a property viewing in 2024. I have found the Council at fault because it failed to keep records of contact with Miss D and has not evidenced that it ensured reasonable adjustments were made with a Property Agent. The Council has agreed to make service improvements and to pay Miss D redress for uncertainty.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking penalty because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and it is not a good use of public resources to investigate how the Council dealt with Mr Y’s complaint.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed considering the complainant’s housing application. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint by making a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to issue Mr X with a fixed penalty notice. This is because an investigation cannot achieve the desired outcome.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of property disrepair at his mother’s (Mrs Y) private accommodation. We found the Council was at fault in delaying inspecting the accommodation and issuing the outcome of that inspection. It was also at fault in attempting to arrange a re-inspection later in 2024. It was not at fault in declining to commence formal legal action against the landlord. The Council’s faults caused Mrs Y injustice in the form of uncertainty for which we are recommending a remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discharge Miss X from its main housing duty. This is because Miss X has a right to a review of the Council’s decision, and it would be reasonable for her to use it.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because the complainant could have appealed to the tribunal and because there is on-going legal action.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council mishandled Mr X’s request for a payment plan. Mr X’s complaint is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion and investigate now.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about demand notices the Council sent Mr X over unpaid penalty charge notices. There is no evidence of fault and Mr X did not experience an injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to take enforcement action against a vehicle without a blue badge which was parked for 12 hours in the disabled parking bay outside his house. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to consider consultation responses received about the instillation of double yellow lines near her property. Miss X says it seems as though the Council predetermined the outcome of the consultation. Miss X says this has caused her inconvenience. We have not found fault in the actions of the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council not providing her with section 117 aftercare following her discharge from hospital. This is because the Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused by the likely fault.

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

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision and decision-making process when refusing to adopt an alley providing access to his and others’ properties. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant us investigating. There is insufficient significant personal injustice caused to Mr X by the Council’s decision to justify an investigation. We also cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council issuing her a Fixed Penalty Notice for fly tipping. This is because Ms X can raise a defence against the issuing of the notice in court if she believes it was incorrectly issued and decides not to pay it.