LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to enforce conditions on a planning permission. The Council has proposed to take action which is a satisfactory way to address the issues raised in the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with an application to consider if a telecommunication monopole required prior approval. This is because we could not add to the Council’s previous investigation, could not achieve the outcome the complainant seeks and because any fault has not caused the complainant a significant personal injustice.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council has persistently failed to collect her garden waste, and failed to respond to her stage two complaint. We find fault with the Council for the missed collections and delayed complaint response, causing Miss X frustration and inconvenience. We have agreed remedies to ensure this does not continue.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to clear leaves which have blocked drains and caused flooding to Ms X’s property. This is because Ms X has a court remedy for claims of damage against the Council which places the complaint outside our jurisdiction and because any current problems should be the subject of a new complaint to the Council.

Summary: There was fault by the Council, because of ongoing problems with its waste collections from the complainant’s address. The Council has now agreed to undertake a period of monitoring to identify and resolve the problem, and to offer the complainant a modest financial remedy to reflect her frustration at the poor service she has received. We have therefore completed our investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for a parking offence. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The complainant has already used their right of appeal to a court. Therefore, the complaint is outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council unfairly removed its garden waste collection service for his road due to access concerns, but his neighbouring road also has narrow access but still has the service. There was fault by the Council for failing to provide evidence of its decision making and for poor complaint handling. The Council has agreed with our recommendations to provide Mr X with an apology, a financial remedy, and to provide proper records after reassessing both roads.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council changing the way household waste was collected in his street, and how it has monitored the scheme. The Council has not changed the waste collection system as claimed, and has taken action to monitor and manage the way residents have been dealing with their waste. There is not enough evidence of Council fault to warrant investigation, and no different outcome an investigation would achieve.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly refused him a Disabled Facilities Grant for adaptations to his home. He complained its decision was based on a flawed occupational therapy assessment and during a home visit to assess the adaptations, a council officer was rude to him. The Council was not at fault for its decision making around the Disabled Facilities Grant. We could not make a finding regarding the allegation against the council officer as there is no evidence to substantiate either account. We have not investigated the occupational therapy assessment as this is a matter for a sepa

Summary: Mrs D says the Council delayed providing Assisted Collections for garden waste and failed to make regular collections. The Ombudsman has found evidence of fault by the Council. He has completed and upheld the complaint because the Council agrees to pay Mrs D redress.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s enforcement agents visiting Mr X about debts he did not owe. This is because the Council has agreed our invitation to provide a suitable remedy for the injustice its faults caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Mr X’s complaint about a parish council as it is unlikely we will find any Council fault has caused a significant injustice to Mr X and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Mrs X’s neighbour’s planning application. This is because there is no evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with the application.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council granting planning permission for a clear glazed window with unrestricted openings at a property next to the complainant. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council assessed the planning application.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council‘s handling of Mr X’s complaint about the conduct of local councillors as there is insufficient evidence of Mr X being caused significant injustice by any Council fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of matters relating to an alleyway and fencing which run at the back of Ms X’s property. This is because an investigation is unlikely to add to that already undertaken by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Mr C said the Council failed to take sufficient action to prevent a business close to his home from disturbing his family early in the mornings. The Council was at fault for a failure to take action against the business for a period of two months. This fault caused Mr C injustice as his sleep was disturbed and his mental health suffered. The Council has already apologised to Mr C and paid him £500 in recognition of the injustice caused. It has agreed to pay £200 more.

Summary: Mr B complains the Council repeatedly failed to collect his garden waste bin, a service that he paid for. He says the Council has given mixed responses about where he needs to leave the bin. The Ombudsman finds fault for the delay in responding to Mr B’s complaint and for not providing clarity about where to leave his bin.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss C’s complaint about missed garden waste collections. This is because the alleged fault has not caused Miss C a significant injustice which would justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to taken enforcement action against and extension to the property belonging to the complainant’s neighbour’s. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to replace a litter bin at a bus stop outside the complainant’s home. We are unlikely to find fault in the way the Council came to its decision.

Ms X complains about the grant of planning permission for a neighbour’s extension. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council repeatedly missed her garden waste collections and did not return after she reported them. The Council was at fault for failing to provide an adequate collection service, respond to Mrs X’s first complaint or issue a refund when it said it would. This caused Mrs X avoidable frustration and meant she went to time and trouble to report the missed collections. The Council has now refunded Mrs X the cost of the garden waste collections which partially remedies her injustice. The Council will also apologise.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to provide an adequate refuse collection service. The Council was at fault for repeated missed collections, and for issues with its complaints handling. The Council will apologise and pay Mr X £100 for the frustration caused by repeated missed collections and the time and trouble taken trying to resolve his complaint. The Council will also consider what actions it should take to improve its service and remind its staff about proper complaints processes.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.