LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We do not consider Bedford Borough Council and East London NHS Foundation appropriately supported Mr Q’s sensory, mental health, social care, and communication needs. This most likely impacted his wellbeing. The Council also did not offer his mother, Mrs P, a carer’s assessment after June 2020, which caused her uncertainty. The Council and Trust should take action to remedy Mr Q and Mrs P’s injustice.

Summary: We do not consider Bedford Borough Council and East London NHS Foundation appropriately supported Mr Q’s sensory, mental health, social care, and communication needs. This most likely impacted his wellbeing. The Council also did not offer his mother, Mrs P, a carer’s assessment after June 2020, which caused her uncertainty. The Council and Trust should take action to remedy Mr Q and Mrs P’s injustice.

Summary: The complainants alleged that the Council failed to care properly for their son when he was in its care. The Council has carried out an independent investigation and has accepted the findings of fault made. We accept those findings, and the findings of no fault, and we do not consider that we can add to the investigation already carried out. However, the Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused by the faults in the way we recommended. We have therefore completed our investigation and are closing the complaint.

Summary: There was no fault in the way the Council handled Mr X's grant-funded home adaptations. As there were no council-approved contractors available, Mr X agreed to find one himself. The specifications and inspections were in line with good practice guidance and the Council withheld final payment because of a dispute with Mr X’s contractor. The Council’s actions were in line with the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has responded to complaints about Mrs X’s landlord. This is because we cannot investigate complaints where someone has a right of appeal to Tribunal. Mrs X has a right of appeal to Tribunal regarding her landlord’s service charges and there is no reason why she cannot pursue this.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to gather satisfactory advice from a speech and language therapist. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council is employing too many staff to clean public toilets at a bus station. This is because Mr B has not suffered a significant injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about false information in a report considered in court. This is because the issues Mrs X raises are not separable from matters already considered before the family court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to properly communicate with the complainant and failed to inform her of her right of appeal against the Council’s assessment of her child’s needs. This is because the Council has taken appropriate actions in response to the issues raised and therefore, we could not add to its investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s removal of foliage which Mr X says led to his home being burgled. It is reasonable for Mr X to submit an insurance claim against the Council and if no liability is accepted to seek a remedy in the courts.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax support. The Council has agreed to write off the outstanding debt, that remedies any injustice caused.

Summary: Mr B complained about the actions of an Allotment Association. The Council told him that it could not intervene. However, the Association is carrying out administrative functions on behalf of the Council, and as such the Council retains responsibility for the Association’s actions. The Council will review how it handles these matters and apologise to Mr B.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint the Council was wrong to refuse her application for home to school transport. It is unlikely we would find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about a council tax discount. This is because it is reasonable for Ms B to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: Ms X complains that she was billed for care that she did not receive and was not supported against financial abuse. There was fault by the Council because it did not include any contingency plan in Ms X’s care plan. The Council agreed a financial remedy to reflect the injustice caused to Ms X.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about alleged breaches of the law by the Council in dealing with Mr X’s son’s special educational needs. Mr X has sought to judicially review the Council’s actions and there is thus an absolute bar against us investigating these matters.

Summary: Mr X complains about how the Council handled his neighbour’s retrospective planning application for two air conditioning units’ installation. The Council was at fault for failing to carry out a night-time noise assessment. As a result, it failed to consider the impact the air conditioning units’ installation would have on Mr X’s amenity. This caused Mr X distress, inconvenience and time and trouble. Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: Miss X complains that the Council was wrong to carry out a child protection investigation, that its investigation was flawed and that a decision to place the children on a child protection plan was incorrect. She says this has caused stress to her family and damage to her reputation and health. The Council is at fault with regards to information sharing with the child protection conference and an inaccuracy in the conference report. Only the inaccuracy caused injustice to Miss X. The Council has agreed to a financial remedy, an apology and to place a note on the record correcting the

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s investigation into alleged racism by the Chair and Vice Chair of a group of which the Council is a member. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The group is not a Council group and the Chair and Vice Chair are not Councillors or Council Officers. We cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to backdate Mr X’s council tax payments. That is because the matter has already been considered by the Court and is outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council failed to notify him about possible recovery action and costs when seeking to recover his council tax arrears. He said this caused upset and stress. We do not find the Council at fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to deal with Mr X’s complaint. The matters complained of are not separable from matters that have been before a court, which we cannot investigate. A complaint about the handling of data is for the Information Commissioner’s Office, not us. Claims for compensation are also more appropriately dealt with through the courts.