LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council referred Mrs X’s parking penalty to an enforcement agency. This is because the complaint is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

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

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council wrongly enforced a penalty charge notice as he had paid to park as Mr X could have challenged this via an appeal to London Tribunals.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about missed garden waste collections. The Council upheld Mr X’s complaint and apologised, therefore, further investigation will not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not responding to his freedom of information request. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because the complainant can follow the statutory process and appeal to the tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council has delayed in reviewing the condition of a property she leased to it following the end of the rental agreement. That is because the courts are best placed to consider the matter.

Summary: Mr X complained about a Council planning decision for an extension on his neighbours, Y’s, land. Mr X said Y’s extension had not been built in accordance with the approved plans and the Council had delayed taking enforcement action. We have ended this investigation because Y submitted a retrospective planning application and it was unlikely to result in a finding of fault, a remedy for Mr X or any other meaningful outcome.

Summary: Mrs X complained about delays with the Council’s investigation of her complaint about children’s social care. There were delays with the Council’s investigation which has caused Mrs X further avoidable distress. The Council agreed to complete its investigation without further delay, apologise to Mrs X and pay her a financial remedy. It also agreed to review part of its process for dealing with complaints about children’s services.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how a Council has dealt with a Freedom of Information Act request because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to approach the Information Commissioner.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s request that the complainant remove a shed from the garden of her temporary accommodation. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a Council decision that she is not eligible to join its housing register. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because it is reasonable to expect Miss Y to approach the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals about the matter.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of matters involving his children. The law prevents us from investigating anything that is or has been the subject of court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to respond to Mr X’s representations against a penalty charge notice. This is because the Council’s actions did not cause Mr X significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to investigate fraudulent council tax accounts set up at her property and its decision to recover the outstanding council tax debts from her. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Miss X’s housing application. This is because it is reasonable for her to use her right of appeal to the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to respond to Mr X’s correspondence about a penalty charge notice. This is because the Council has agreed to accept payment at the discounted rate and this provides a suitable remedy for the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because the Council has now cancelled the penalty charge notice and this provides a suitable remedy for Miss X. It is therefore unlikely investigation would achieve anything more for Miss X.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that she was wrongly issued with a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it is reasonable for Miss B to put in an appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint the Council mismanaged her case which led to her having to pay upfront to secure a private rental property. This was despite the Council having already paid the property agent a deposit and rent. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about unpaid work carried out for the Council or about a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) issued to him. The courts are better placed to resolve any issues relating to contractual matters and the issuing of the PCN has not caused him a significant personal injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the banding priority the Council has given her housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, an investigation would not lead to any more outcomes.