LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s housing allocation decision, and the accessibility issues she is facing. This is because we have not found enough evidence of fault to justify investigating the first part of her complaint. The second part of her complaint is premature and therefore we will not investigate it.

Summary: Miss B complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application. We find the Council at fault for referring Miss B to the incorrect support team. This caused a delay in Miss B receiving the correct housing support. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Miss B to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council failing to provide him with appropriate housing grant support in 2022. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how he was treated at a Council leisure centre. The Council upheld Mr X’s complaint and provided an appropriate remedy so further investigation would not add to the one carried out by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the education and special educational support provided to her child, Y, since 2022. Part of the complaint is late and the Council has not yet had the opportunity to consider and respond to a complaint about more recent matters.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about matters affecting Mr X’s temporary accommodation. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to take court action on the alleged damage to his health. There is not significant enough injustice separate from that point to warrant investigation.

Summary: We have decided not to investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council delayed assessing her housing register application. The Council has upheld the complaint and has agreed to remedy Ms X’s injustice by way of an apology and payment of £100. Further investigation by us would not be proportionate.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaints about the involvement of the Council’s children’s social services. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault for most of the complaint, and because Mr X can complain to the Information Commissioner about his right to rectification request.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council document including incorrect information about Mr X. An investigation would not achieve anything for him.

Summary: The Council was at fault for the delay in moving Miss X to suitable temporary accommodation and for poor communication when she moved. It was also at fault for the delay in resolving pest infestation and boiler issues in Miss X’s accommodations. There was no fault in the way the Council dealt with mould in her accommodation. The Council will apologise and make a symbolic payment to Miss X in recognition of the avoidable distress and frustration caused by its faults.

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council has not dealt with his noise complaints appropriately. He says the noise has therefore continued and impacted his home life. We found the Council is not at fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council failed to arrange suitable education for her son. This is because part of the complaint is late, the Council has already offered a suitable remedy and Mrs X had a right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal which it would have been reasonable for her to use.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the coroner’s service. This is because the law does not allow us to investigate the actions of the coroner and their officers.

Summary: Miss D says the Council left her in unsafe temporary accommodation. I have found the Council at fault and Miss D was left in unsuitable accommodation for 22 months. The Council has agreed to pay Miss D redress.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council undertook the Future Grenfell Support consultation. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed dealing with Ms Y’s homeless application and it delayed offering Ms Y interim accommodation. We find the Council was at fault for its delays in dealing with Ms Y’s homeless application and its delays in offering her interim accommodation. These delays caused Ms Y frustration, distress and upset and she was deprived of suitable accommodation. The Council has agreed to make payments to Ms Y to reflect her injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about refuge accommodation because it was not arranged by this Council. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to end its duty to provide interim accommodation to justify further investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s responses to Mrs X’s complaints about care failings at her former place of work. This is because it is unlikely we could achieve anything worthwhile and there are more suitable agencies better addressed to deal with her complaints.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms X’s contact with Children Services. This is because we cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a residents meeting arranged by the Council. This is because her complaint is late and there are not sufficiently good reasons as to why she could not have complained sooner.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council issuing him a Fixed Penalty Notice for littering. This is because Mr X could have raised a defence against the issuing of the notice in court if he considered there was fault in the way it was issued.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged because of the Council’s decision to locate a cycle hire area in the wrong location. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to put in a compensation claim to the Council, and if needed, pursue the claim at court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his housing situation because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing sufficient injustice to justify our involvement.

Summary: Ms X complained there were failings in the way the Council dealt with her homelessness and housing applications causing her distress and financial loss. We found fault by the Council as it delayed reviewing Ms X’s situation in 2023 and 2024 and dealing with Ms X’s homelessness application. The Council has already apologised for the delay and offered a suitable remedy for the injustice caused in this case. So, we have ended our investigation.

Summary: We have upheld Mr X’s complaint about a delay in carrying out a Care Act assessment. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to remedy the frustration caused, which is appropriate so we will not investigate further.