LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mr A complained on behalf of Mr B about the Council’s decision to cease Mr B’s Education, Health and Care Plan in 2020 and failure to support him to get back into education since then. We found the Council was at fault for the delay in the Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment process from March 2024 and records keeping around its decision for additional funding for Mr B’s social care support. The Council agreed to our recommendations on what to do to remedy the injustice its faults caused to Mr B.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome because the complainant is awaiting a fresh review of their application.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s contact with the Council and its complaints handling. The Council has already investigated under the children’s statutory complaint procedures, and further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council delayed investigating his noise complaint. We found the Council delayed taking action and responding to Mr X, which caused him distress and inconvenience. The Council has accepted fault and agreed to pay Mr X £500 to recognise the impact of the delay.

Summary: Miss W complains about the Council’s handling of her need for rehousing following alleged acts of anti-social behaviour against her. She says the Council delayed in finding her alternative housing and, once it did make her an offer, that this was unsuitable for her household’s needs. We found the Council delayed in deciding whether to offer Miss W alternative accommodation. It also failed to appropriately consider and decide the matter of suitability, as well as her request for an internal review. The Council’s fault ultimately delayed Miss W being rehoused in suitable accommodation a

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not removing an illegally parked, abandoned car. This is because the matter complained about has not caused Mr X any significant personal injustice which is so serious that it warrants a further investigation by this office.

Summary: We found there was no fault in the way the Council dealt with Ms X’s contacts following the issue of a Penalty Charge Notice and the case being passed to enforcement agents.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Housing allocations, banding and housing benefits

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council issuing her business a Fixed Penalty Notice. This is because Miss X can raise a defence against the issuing of the notice in court if she considers it was incorrectly issued and wishes to challenge it further.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council owes his business money. That is because the Courts are best placed to deal with contractual matters.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage by a Council owned tree to the complainant’s property. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to go to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to collect Mrs X’s bin from her front garden unless they are presented next to her path on the property boundary. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault, or to show the Council’s decision caused Mrs X significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a homelessness application and its decision that Miss X was intentionally homeless. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the decision about interim accommodation. It was reasonable for Miss X to use the review/appeals procedure offered by the homelessness legislation.

Summary: We have upheld Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s delay to respond to his complaint regarding his late mother’s care charges and the support she received in a care home. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused. The Council will investigate Mr B’s complaint, apologise to him and pay him £150 for the frustration and distress caused. It will also provide training for its staff on its new software system to address any gaps in knowledge and minimise complaint handling delays.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council issuing her a Fixed Penalty Notice for littering. This is because Miss X can raise a defence in court if she believes it was wrongly issued.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of representations against a parking penalty charge notice as it is unlikely we will find it to be at fault.

Summary: Ms X complained that the Independent Admission Appeals Panel failed to properly consider her appeal for a school place for her child. There was fault in the way the Panel considered Ms X’s appeal and reached its decision. The Council will apologise to Ms X for the avoidable frustration and uncertainty caused by the fault, hold a new appeal hearing with new panel members and clerk and provide training or guidance on the statutory guidance for clerks and panel members.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mrs X’s contact with the Council. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. The Council has agreed to cancel the notice which is the outcome Mr X was seeking. It is unlikely an investigation by us would lead to a different outcome or achieve anything more.

Summary: Ms C complains the Council has not provided support to meet her eligible care needs. The Council is at fault for failing to produce a support plan which identifies what services meet Ms C’s eligible needs. Because of these faults Ms C has the uncertainty that the reablement services offered by the Council will not meet her needs. To remedy the complaint the Council has agreed to apologise to Ms C, produce a support plan, and make service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms X’s request for a homelessness prevention fund payment. This is because the complaint is late, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about council tax support. This is because the law does not allow us to investigate matters that have been appealed to a tribunal.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide her family with suitable temporary accommodation under its homelessness duties. The Council accepted fault when it investigated Miss X’s complaint, in that it failed to consider suitability of accommodation and took too long to respond to the complaint. The Council apologised and paid a financial remedy. After our investigation, it agreed to offer a further financial remedy for the injustice caused. It will also issue staff reminders and decide any changes needed to its processes to avoid the same faults in future.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to correct an issue with her ‘My Waltham Forest’ account. We found there was a failure to address the issue for a prolonged period. This meant she was not able to place bids for housing and her account was closed inappropriately because she was unable to re-register as required. We found Ms X did not miss out on housing as a result of the issue, but we recommended a payment to recognise the distress caused. We also found the Council placed Ms X in unsuitable bed and breakfast accommodation for too long and we recommended a payment to recognise this.