LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal of his dropped kerb application. This is because we could not add to the investigation that the Council carried out, and there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to warrant us investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council supported Miss X as a care leaver. This is because we could not add to any previous investigation by the Council and Miss X’s injustice caused by any fault there was, has already been remedied. In addition, we cannot achieve the remedy Miss X wants.

Summary: We will use our discretion not to investigate this complaint about a refund for a business parking permit because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in carrying out a review because it has already apologised and offered to pay her £100 for the injustice caused. Further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome. There is otherwise insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council handled the offer of a property to discharge its homelessness duty to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s poor communication regarding a policy change to charge for replacement bins. This is because Miss X was not caused a significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s process for appealing Penalty Charge Notices. There is insufficient evidence of fault and an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint relating to freedom of information matters. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is the body best placed to consider it.

Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about the handling of her Jobseeker’s Allowance claim because it lies outside our jurisdiction. This is because the complaint is not about an administrative function of the Council. The Council is not responsible for the issues raised as it is about decisions made by the Department for Work and Pensions.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about Council tax arrears. This is because

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has not carried out repairs to the property they lease to the Council to be used as temporary accommodation. The Council has not completed the repairs and has not kept her informed of when they will be completed. Apologising and carrying out the repairs remedies the injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s installation of a pedestrian crossing. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice caused by the Council’s actions which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by the Council. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre at Northampton County Court to make a late witness statement/statutory declaration.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to inspect a property that she rents out. This is because there is no evidence of a significant injustice to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to position a bus stop outside his property. This is because the decision did not cause Mr X significant enough injustice to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s children’s services involvement when he was a child. This is because, given the passage of time, we do not consider there is a realistic prospect of reaching a sound, fair and meaningful decision. We also could not achieve the outcome Mr X is seeking.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his report of a breach of planning control near his home. We found no fault in how the Council reached its decision not to take enforcement action against the breach.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the removal and destruction of the complainant's vehicle as we cannot provide the outcome he seeks as this is a matter for the courts.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s investigation into reported noise nuisance coming from a nearby business premises. The Council has taken reasonable steps to investigate the matter, and it is unlikely we would find evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her neighbour’s application for a dropped kerb. This is because the complaint is late and I have seen no good reasons to exercise my discretion to investigate it. There is also not enough evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely we could achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mrs X.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about a replacement bin provided by the Council. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of its planning enforcement investigations into works carried out at the complainant’s property. It is unlikely we could achieve a substantively different or worthwhile outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to end the homelessness prevention duty. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigating and because Ms X has appeal rights that are reasonable for her to exercise.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council responded to a complaint about parking charges. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint that the Council incorrectly awarded her a priority date of May 2020. This is because the complaint is late.

Summary: Mr Y complained about the Council’s actions and lack of support when he approached it for homelessness advice. This led to him to being housed out of the area and he is now ineligible for its housing register. This caused him significant distress impacting on his mental health and wellbeing. We found the Council at fault. It agreed to make an apology, pay a further symbolic payment, and make a decision about a housing register application.