LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has failed to maintain a tree outside of her property and has changed its mind on the actions it would take without explanation. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for its communication with Mrs X. The Council has agreed to apologise, provide an update, and properly consider the concerns Mrs X raised.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how to meet adult social care needs. There is not enough evidence of fault in the process the Council followed to decide Ms C’s capacity to decide about her care and to assess how best to meet her needs. The Ombudsman could not achieve the outcome the complainant wants, which is to say Ms C needs 24-hour care. The Court of Protection would be best placed to decide a dispute about capacity and an appropriate care plan.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision on how it would provide her with information she asked for. Another investigation would not change the outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing to waive a payment due, which Mrs X said built up following administrative errors. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our further involvement.

Summary: Miss Y complained about the way the Council dealt with her child, Z’s education and Education Health and Care Plan. We have found fault by the Council, causing injustice, in failing to: properly consider alternative provision for Z in May 2022; complete Z’s transition review within the statutory timescales; and communicate about the amended EHC Plan. And with its poor complaint handling process and SENDIASS service failure. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice by apologising, making a payment to recognise Miss Y and Z’s distress and service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that Ms X wrongly received letters from the Council’s enforcement agents about someone else’s council tax debt as any alleged Council fault did not cause Ms X a level of injustice that would justify our further involvement.

Summary: Mr X complains on behalf of his mother, Mrs Y. He says the care provider on behalf of the Council failed to communicate with the family and did not have any understanding of his mother’s needs. He also says it had unsafe practices. Mr X says the Council failed to respond to him when he raised a complaint. Mr X says this caused him and his family distress. We have found fault in the actions of the Council for failing to ensure the care provider could access Mrs Y’s property leading to missed medication and for failing to respond to Mr X’s complaint. The Council has agreed to issue an a

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in completing repair works and its complaint handling. Any injustice suffered is not significant enough to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to move Mrs X into a nursing home and its decision she was a full cost-payer. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because it is a complaint about negligence which is a legal matter for the courts to consider and decide.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. This is because it is unlikely an investigation by this office could add to the response already provided via the Council’s own investigation of the matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to introduce a parking restriction outside Mrs X’s home. We are unlikely to find fault and, in any case, we could not achieve the outcome she wants.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaints about the Council's handling of a report used in court. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. We have no remit to consider reports used in court. And there is no evidence of fault in the Councill’s decision not to investigate her complaint about a matter decided in court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of parking provision and other enforcement on Miss X’s roadway. There is not enough evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to not apply a property disregard for the purposes of deciding care charges. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it has sought to determine if a property disregard should be applied in accordance with the Care Act 2014 and its statutory guidance. Further, the Council has offered to review its decision following receipt of evidence by the complainant and we cannot add to this outcome.

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about delays in the postal voting process for the 2024 general election. This is because the Returning Officer is responsible for the management of postal votes and their actions are not within our jurisdiction to investigate.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about his car being damaged by a pothole. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing to consider and reply to a complaint on it not keeping to Mr B’s requested adjustments to its procedures and on it wrongly disclosing his personal information to his landlord. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. We have already decided complaints about events leading to the complaint and will not investigate the Council’s complaints handling separately. The Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to consider complaints ab

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to provide the care and support at home that her mother-in-law Mrs Y needed when she was discharged from hospital. There is no fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an alleged failure by the Council to provide accurate and timely information concerning charges for adult social care. This is because we cannot add to the Council’s previous investigation and outcome agreed with the complainant. There is also insufficient evidence of a significant enough injustice being caused by any fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a delay by the Council in removing a dropped kerb. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant would like.

Summary: Dr X complains about an Approved Mental Health Professional’s application to detain Mr Y under the Mental Health Act. There is no evidence of fault in how the Approved Mental Health Professional assessed Mr Y. But the Council is at fault as the Approved Mental Health Professional failed to properly notify Dr X of her rights as the nearest relative. This fault will have caused uncertainty to Dr X which the Council has agreed to apologise for.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council issued a care plan for his father, Mr F, with more care than he needed at a significant cost which it did not explain. Mr X said his father would not have agreed to the care plan if the Council had told him the cost, especially as he could manage with less care. The Ombudsman found the Council followed procedure when it drafted the care plans and assessed Mr F’s finances but is at fault for failing to communicate this effectively.

Summary: The Council was at fault for delaying changes to Ms B’s son’s special educational needs support, which included a delay to finding him a new school. It could also have done more to ensure that he received any sort of education while he was out of school. It then failed to deal with some of Ms B’s complaints properly. It has agreed to make symbolic payments to Ms B and her son to recognise their injustice, to respond to any outstanding complaints, and to take steps to improve its service.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.