LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s application for a school place. This is because it is unlikely we could add anything to the Council’s response and an investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about how the Council responded to her concerns about statutory nuisance. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s assessment of the adaptations she needs to meet her medical needs. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly decided it would not provide support with post-16 school transport costs for his child D, who is disabled and has an Education, Health, and Care Plan. There was fault by the Council which caused avoidable distress and confusion for Mr X and meant it did not properly consider his appeal about this issue. The Council agreed to reconsider Mr X’s appeal, apologise, and pay a financial remedy. It will also ensure its published policy accurately describes its appeal process, review its record keeping procedures for appeals, and provide training to staff a

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s assessment of her housing application. The Council has since completed a reassessment of her housing needs and Ms X has requested a review of this decision. It is reasonable to allow the Council to complete this process.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council not allowing the public to comment on online news articles. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about Council Tax liability and the Council’s decision not to apply a discretionary reduction. This is because the decision holds the right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal and it would be reasonable for her to use it.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his child’s Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan, including the content of the EHC Plan. This is because the injustice claimed stems from the content of the Plan and if Mr X disagrees with the Plan, it would have been reasonable for him to appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Miss X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to provide adequate support for children in his care. This is because his complaint is made late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion and consider it now.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the loss of her personal property from her temporary accommodation. This is because this is a claim for damages best decided in court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council’s handling of a building control matter. This is because the substantive issue concerns a dispute over whether Mr X’s building work complies with the Building Regulations and it would be reasonable for Mr X to take this to the Planning Inspector.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant cannot have a parking permit. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council decision not to assign further priority to Mrs X’s housing application. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council assessed the application. The brief suspension of the application did not disadvantage Mrs X significantly.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about information shared with a third-party by the Council. The law says we cannot investigate complaints about what happened in court.

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s delays when she approached it for homelessness assistance. We find the Council was at fault for its delays in awarding Miss X the relevant homelessness duties, for its poor communication and for its delay in providing Miss X with interim accommodation. These faults caused Miss X distress, frustration and upset and she was deprived of suitable accommodation. The Council upheld some of Miss X’s complaints, apologised and offered her £300. The Council has agreed to our further recommendations to apologise to Miss X for the injustice caused by the del

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about his car being damaged by Council contractors. This is because this is a complaint about negligence which is a legal matter for the courts to consider and decide.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in addressing disrepair in his temporary accommodation because we could not add to the Council’s own investigation. We cannot investigate his complaint about Council action leading to his homelessness because we cannot investigate complaints about court action.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to act when she contacted it with concerns about her late brother’s care and it was difficult to get in contact with anyone. She also complained the care home the Council commissioned failed to get an air mattress for her late brother before he went into hospital and the care home failed to treat his urine infection. We find fault with the care home’s communication with Mrs X and the care it provided to her late brother. The Council was at fault for its communication with Mrs X. These faults have caused Mrs X upset, distress and uncertainty. The Cou

Summary: We found Mr Y’s complaint about the Council failing to pay the independent school where he works a fee increase for two children with Education, Health and Care plans, was not within our jurisdiction. This was because the school could seek a legal remedy through the courts.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to provide her child’s full Education, Health and Care Plan provision since September 2024. Ms X also complained the Council refused to register her complaint and accused her of unreasonable and disruptive behaviour. We have ended our investigation because the Council has taken suitable action and further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome for the EHC Plan provision. We also did not consider the Council’s actions for Ms X’s complaint handling has caused a significant enough personal injustice to justify an investigat

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a refund for parking charges because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr B complained that the Council acted disproportionately in issuing a fixed penalty notice for leaving recycling waste out too early. We have not found fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council’s failure to investigate Mrs X’s complaints about boundary problems with her neighbour since the Council approved a new development in 2020. The problems are not within the Council’s remit as planning authority to resolve and she would need to seek a remedy by civil action in the courts.