LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mrs X complained about the way the Council dealt with her son’s care. The Council was at fault for failing to remedy loss of provision and lack of support services, delaying carrying out agreed adaptations to Mrs X’s property and refusing to consider her complaint at stage three of the Children Act complaints procedure. This caused Mrs X distress and uncertainty. The Council should apologise, make a payment, offer additional provision and send us an action plan for service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate this about how the Council has carried out a financial assessment to determine the complainant’s contribution charges for care. This is there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision his mother should remain in residential care. The Council investigated Mr X’s concerns and apologised that communication with him and his brother was not better. We could not add to the Council’s response by investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s appeal process for a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because the injustice claimed is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council delaying issuing a final Education, Health, and Care Plan for Mrs X’s child. The Council upheld Mrs X’s complaint and has made a suitable offer of a remedy for her injustice. Further investigation by us would not achieve a different outcome.

Summary: Mrs B complained the Council failed to seek advice from an Occupational Therapist (OT) during the Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment process for her daughter, C, and there were also delays. The Council was at fault for its failure to consider alternative ways to get OT advice, and for the delays. Because of the fault, Mrs B suffered distress and frustration, and it meant she continued to contact the Council for updates. Because of the delays, C also missed out on provision she should have received sooner. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs B and C, and make symb

Summary: there was delay issuing Ms M’s son B’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan, and problems with the tuition arranged by the Council when he did not attend school. The Council has completed a thorough investigation and offered a satisfactory remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to a member conduct complaint as it is unlikely we will find fault.

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council dealt with safeguarding allegations involving his mother, Mrs Y. He complained the Council charged her for remaining in a care home while it completed the investigation. Mr X said the Council bullied him and made false allegations to the Office of the Public Guardian. He also complained about the Council’s complaint handling. Mr X said this caused him distress. There was fault in the way the Council did not inform Mr X about the financial implications of the residential placement and delays in the complaint handling. This frustrated Mr X. The Coun

Summary: The Council was not at fault in how it decided Mr X’s adoption allowance. Although it departed from recommendations originally made by the government – which are widely used by other councils – it has provided a reasonable explanation for doing so.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint about the Council issuing a building regulations completion certificate for defective building work. This is because an investigation would not achieve a meaningful outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about parking and neighbour issues. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council disproportionately levelled over 1300 grave memorials without sufficient risk assessment and notice to relatives, causing distress. On the evidence provided we do not find fault with the Council, as it followed its policies and procedures.

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: Mr X complained the Council has failed to properly safeguard his children and has sought to discredit their complaints and disclosures through false statements and unfounded allegations. The Council has taken appropriate action in response to safeguarding concerns relating to Mr X’s children. However, the Council's decision not to investigate Mr X’s complaint was fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement in Miss X’s children’s case. The substantive part of the complaint is late and there is not a good reason for the delay. There is insufficient evidence of fault in more recent events, nor could we provide a meaningful outcome for Miss X as investigation by us will not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful council tax payment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the complainant’s council tax. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and the Council has provided a fair remedy for some faults that did occur.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the accuracy of information provided to the court in private care proceedings by Council social workers. As a court has ordered the information in the form of a section 7 report, its preparation and content is outside our legal jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a child protection investigation. It is unlikely we would achieve a significantly different remedy than already offered.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to charge the full price if the complainant extends his dropped kerb to accommodate the impact of a proposed cycle lane. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not involving Mr B in the process for his child’s Education Health and Care Plan. This is because an Ombudsman investigation would not lead to a different outcome and there is not enough evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about child protection and safeguarding procedures. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council considered the complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Trust has already taken action to remedy the complaint about its actions and investigation by us is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of a headstone test it carried out on Mr X’s relative’s grave. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions and Mr X has not sustained a personal injustice due to this matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about work carried out by the Council’s Bereavement Services at a cemetery frequented by Ms X. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.