LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with reports of private property disrepair. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax recovery. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a building control matter. This is because it is unlikely we could achieve a worthwhile outcome for the complainant.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s concerns about a property near his home or possible breaches of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a safeguarding referral about his child. Further investigation by this office could not add to the response the Council has already provided.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an unauthorised encampment. This is there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that she suffered injuries after tripping on a damaged pavement. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs B to take the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs), and about handling contacts and information requests from Mr X. We cannot by law investigate the PCN matters, the Information Commissioner can better consider complaints about information, and it would be reasonable for Mr X to apply to a court of law to decide whether the Council has discriminated against him.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council incorrectly offered her a refund she was not entitled to. She says this caused her distress. We find the Council at fault with no further remedy required. This is because we are satisfied the Council has remedied the injustice caused to Miss X.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council did not properly process her homelessness application. We found fault by the Council that resulted in Miss X and her family being homeless for four months longer than necessary. The Council agreed to apologise to Miss X and make her a payment in recognition of the injustice caused to her and her family.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complainant has the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax payments because the matter has been remedied and part of the complaint is out of time.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by the Council. This is because it would be reasonable for Ms X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to make a late witness statement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s report written as part of court proceedings. The law prevents us from doing so.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a decision to substantiate a safeguarding concern involving Mr X. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation because the decision was within the range open to the Council given the evidence before it.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council will not send him information about his council tax charges in an electronic format as a reasonable adjustment because he is blind. He also complained the Council has taken money out of his benefits without his consent. He said this has caused embarrassment, financial stress, and impacted on his wellbeing. We do not find the Council at fault.

Summary: X complained about the Council’s decision to allow development on their neighbour’s land. We did not investigate further because we decided we were unlikely to recommend a remedy or change the outcome of the Council’s planning decision.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council beaching her confidential data to a third party. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. This complaint is better dealt with by the Information Commissioner.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in enabling comments on a social media post. We do not consider the complainant has suffered a significant personal injustice which warrants our involvement. Also, the Council has switched on the comment facility, so we consider that an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about incorrect pre-application advice given to Mr X by the Council. This is because fault by the Council did not cause him injustice.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s actions in relation to two penalty charge notices. This is because the injustice he claims stems from the issue of the penalty charge notices and the time and effort he went to, to challenge them and Mr X has used his right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of reports of neighbour anti-social behaviour (ASB) and nuisance made by Mr X. This is because an investigation is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or lead to a significantly different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council disclosing the complainant’s personal information to a third party. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate as the matter is best dealt with by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to close a parking entrance to a car park without warning. This is because an investigation would not lead to any further findings or outcomes. In addition, the alleged fault has not caused any significant injustice.