LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s response to her request for a care needs assessment. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a deferred payment arrangement as there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his safeguarding concerns about his brother. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision Ms X is not homeless. Ms X has rights of review and appeal and it is reasonable for her to exercise these.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council defending a legal claim. This is because the law does not allow us to investigate matters which are connected to court proceedings or employment matters.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council tax premium because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal and there is insufficient injustice to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse Mrs X’s application for free home-to-school transport for her child. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with a breach of planning control and retrospective planning application. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant our involvement.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to properly apply its home-to-school transport policy and explain its decisions. Miss X also said the Council’s policy was inadequate. She said this meant the Council made an incorrect decision about her application for transport assistance. We have found the Council at fault for its deficient policy and for relying on incorrect information when it made its decision. This caused Miss X uncertainty when making her application. This also caused uncertainty about whether the appeal panel would have made a different decision. The Council has agreed to

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s planning officers. This is because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response or achieve anything more for the complainant.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse Mrs X’s application for free home-to-school transport for her child. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about renting out a room. This is mainly because the events

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax support. This is because the Council has agreed to remedy the injustice to Mr X by considering his review request and providing his appeal rights.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint, brought on behalf of the late Mrs Y, about the Council’s decision to not disregard Mrs Y’s house when calculating her finances for care charging purposes. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to investigate it now. Even if Mrs X’s complaint had not been late, we would not have investigated because there is not enough evidence of Council fault to have warranted an investigation.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to secure Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan provision after they moved into its area or complete a review of the plan within statutory time limits. We find the Council at fault, causing frustration and uncertainty and meaning Y did not receive the education he was entitled to. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to recognise the injustice, and act to prevent recurrence.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of anti-social behaviour and noise complaints. It is too late for us to investigate some of the period complained of. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s handling to justify us investigating the remaining period. We also cannot achieve the outcome the complainants want.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s inadequate building control relating to his property. He said this impacted him financially and impacted his mental health. We have discontinued the investigation. This is a late complaint and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to consider this matter now. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider concerns about not providing information.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council followed its safeguarding procedures when it received safeguarding reports about a vulnerable adult, Mr D. Mr and Mrs B who are Mr D’s parents complain about concerns they had from 2017 for a seven-year period. The complaint is late. We could not add to any previous investigation by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays caused when a refuse vehicle failed to pull over to allow Mr X to pass. This is because the injustice caused to him is not significant enough to justify an investigation.

Summary: On behalf of Mr B, Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of a safeguarding incident and subsequent investigations. We find the Council at fault for a delay in completing the safeguarding enquiry and poor communication during the process. This caused Mr X frustration, uncertainty and distress. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic financial payment and complete service improvements to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: The Council was at fault as it failed to provide a suitable alternative provision for Miss X’s child from January 2023 to November 2024, and it poorly communicated and handled her complaint. It was not at fault for making a safeguarding referral. The Council will apologise and make payments to Miss X to recognise the injustice caused by the loss of education and its poor communication and complaint handling. The Council will also remind staff of its duties to consider the alternative provision duty properly to prevent reoccurrence.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning applications. This is because the complainant has appealed, or could have appealed, to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council delayed in issuing a final Education, Health and Care Plan for his son, and failed to provide suitable alternative education while he had no school place. We find there has been fault causing a loss of suitable education for the son and avoidable distress and frustration for the family. The Council has agreed a symbolic payment for this injustice. We are therefore closing the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to make appropriate educational provision for the complainant. The complaint is late and there are insufficient grounds for us to consider it now.