LGO Individual Decisions

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 this late complaint about the Council’s decision in 2022 that Mr X was not in priority need. There is not a good reason for the delay in him complaining, and in any event it was reasonable for him to use his statutory review and appeal rights.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council suspended his direct payment arrangement in place for his care and support. He said this left him without the care and support he needed, affecting his health, wellbeing and finances. We have found the Council at fault for its record keeping and for delays in acting on concerns it had about Mr X’s circumstances. We have also found the Council at fault for the way it ended Mr X’s direct payments and for delay in providing an alternative package of proposed care. We cannot say this caused Mr X an injustice in the form of missed care provision, but find this c

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about children services’ actions. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision not to accommodate Y. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider data protection complaints, and we are unlikely to achieve more than the Council ending child protection plans.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered Mr X’s housing priority. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We have upheld Ms X’s complaint about housing priority banding. The Council have agreed to a suitable remedy for the injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a long wait for rehousing through the Council’s housing register because there is insufficient evidence of fault. We cannot investigate complaints about disrepair in Council properties.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to use his right of appeal.

Summary: We upheld a complaint from Ms B that the Council failed to make suitable education provision for her son who has special educational needs. As a result, he experienced a loss of provision and Ms B suffered distress. The Council accepted these findings and agreed actions to remedy these injustices. It also agreed to make a service improvement to prevent a repeat of some of the fault found in this case.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s lack of response to Mr X’s complaint about his unsuitable housing. This is because we could not add to the investigation already carried out by the Council.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to reimburse Miss X for her lost possessions left at a local leisure centre. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to result in finding fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to not remove a redundant dropped kerb on his street. He also complained of poor communication and said the Council gave conflicting information about which residents are permitted to park over the dropped kerbs on his street. We have decided not to investigate the Council’s decision not to remove the dropped kerb, as there is no significant injustice to justify doing so. However, we have investigated Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s poor communication. We find the Council at fault. This has caused Mr X frustration, and he has spent tim

Summary: The Council was at fault for severe delays in adapting Mrs X's property to meet the needs of her two disabled children. This caused Mrs X to move out of her home for longer than expected and live in a home where she could not meet her children’s care needs. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X to recognise the distress, uncertainty and frustration caused by its failings. It will also develop an action plan to complete the remaining work.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council introducing double yellow lines near the complainant’s home. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council originally decided to implement the lines, and it has taken satisfactory to address the issues raised in the subsequent complaint.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council did not deal with her housing properly, causing distress. The Council is at fault because it delayed moving her from unsuitable accommodation and delayed completing a suitability review. Miss X suffered avoidable distress. The Council should apologise and pay Miss X £1,750.

Summary: Ms X complained about how she and her children were treated by the Council’s children’s social care service. We have found that the Council was at fault for a significant delay in its handling of

Summary: Ms D complains the Council failed to clarify if it had inspected her temporary accommodation and was aware of repairs needed to it. I have found fault by the Council because it did not properly explain about the inspections at the property to Ms D leaving her uncertain about what had happened. I have asked the Council to apologise to Ms D.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to terminate her allotment tenancy. This is because

Summary: Mr X complains on behalf of Mrs Y that the Council has not dealt properly with care charges. The Council is at fault because it did not respond to Mr X’s concerns about charges between October 2023 and July 2024. The Council should apologise and provide a detailed explanation of charges.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Fixed Penalty Notice the complainant received when his refuse was found on the floor in a communal bin area. This is because the courts were better placed to decide the matter.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint about a child protection plan because there is no evidence of fault which would justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because the complaint is late without good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating now.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her housing register application because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing sufficient injustice to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to take action to stop vehicles driving over the pavement to park in front of shops in the complainant’s area. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to use the alternative court remedy if she believes the Council is failing to properly maintain the pavement, and there is insufficient evidence of other fault causing the complainant a significant personal injustice, and we are unlikely to achieve a substantively different outcome.