LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mx D complains the Council failed to meet their housing and social care needs when they were homeless. They said, as a result they experienced distress and had a loss of care support. We found the Council’s Housing and Adult Social Care teams caused delays and faults in its processes. The Council will apologise and make payment to acknowledge the injustice Mx D experienced.

Summary: Mx D complains the Council failed to meet their housing and social care needs when they were homeless. They said, as a result they experienced distress and had a loss of care support. We found the Council’s Housing and Adult Social Care teams caused delays and faults in its processes. The Council will apologise and make payment to acknowledge the injustice Mx D experienced.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council refusing to investigate a gully outside her property that frequently gets blocked. This is because an investigation would not lead to any worthwhile outcomes.

Summary: We found no fault on Mrs P’s complaint about the Council’s planning enforcement team failing to take prompt and effective action against an unauthorised development. The environmental health team delayed responding to her initial report, failed to contact her after receiving the developer’s response to her reports, and failed to provide evidence of visits to her home. It also failed to produce a written nuisance assessment or give her written feedback. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Summary: Ms D complains about faults by Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council and Calderdale & Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust in managing her mother, Mrs X’s, discharge from hospital. We have upheld Ms D’s complaints about assessing Mrs X’s ability to make her own decisions, consent and sharing information about community nursing needs. We have not upheld the rest of the complaint. The Council and Trust accept our recommendations, so we have completed our investigation.

Summary: Ms D complains about faults by Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council and Calderdale & Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust in managing her mother, Mrs X’s, discharge from hospital. We have upheld Ms D’s complaints about assessing Mrs X’s ability to make her own decisions, consent and sharing information about community nursing needs. We have not upheld the rest of the complaint. The Council and Trust accept our recommendations, so we have completed our investigation.

Summary: Mr B complained about the way the Council dealt with his homeless application after he was evicted from asylum support accommodation. He was placed in bed and breakfast accommodation for too long and was forced to move to unsuitable temporary accommodation before being moved back to bed and breakfast accommodation again. This caused him significant distress inconvenience and extra costs. We have found fault with the Council. It has agreed to apologise to Mr B, pay him £2,600 and improve its procedures for the future.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council closing a road as part of a School Street traffic management scheme. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council decided to make the scheme permanent.

Summary: Mrs X made several complaints about how the Council handled her daughter’s Education, Health, and Care plan, and ensured she had education, including special education provision while she was not going to school. We cannot investigate some of Mrs X’s complaint because they are outside our jurisdiction, and of the other parts of her complaint we have considered, there was no fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a tree the Council felled and the behaviour of the contractor who did the work. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: The Council acknowledged a delay in Mrs Y receiving rehabilitation services during her stay in nursing home before the complaint came to this office, and waived care fees for five months. Any further investigation by this office could achieve no more.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaints about his care plan and support because we have already investigated them. We will also not investigate Mr X’s complaint that he was unable to speak to his named adviser when he telephoned the Council’s automated line. The Council has resolved the matter. Further investigation would achieve nothing more.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax liability because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to reimburse the complainant for costs associated with her child’s education. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault and because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain about the lack of support they experienced from the Council as registered foster carers since 2017. They said it caused them avoidable distress. We found the Council was not at fault in how it supported Mr and Mrs X. However, the Council was at fault for the frequent social worker changes, and it agreed to apologise for the frustration and confusion this caused to Mr and Mrs X.

Summary: Mr D says the Council delayed responding to reports about vermin and failed to take action. I have found evidence of fault by the Council because it failed to communicate the outcome of its investigation to Mr D. It handled the rest of the case correctly. Because of that error I have upheld the complaint and completed the investigation. The Council agrees to apologise to Mr D.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s request for funding for a replacement boiler. This is because an investigation is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a council tax liability dispute. This is because it was reasonable for Mr X to have used his right to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a delivery charge for a new bin. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice.

Summary: X complained about the Council’s decisions relating to development behind X’s home. X said that their amenity is affected by some parts of the development. We did not investigate this complaint further as enforcement action is ongoing and we were unlikely to find fault, recommend a remedy or reach any other meaningful outcome.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council failed to properly investigate her reports of a water leak and noise nuisance from an adjoining property and her concerns about her water supply. We will not investigate the complaint because an investigation is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to identify a suitable school placement or provide suitable alternative provision for her foster daughter, Y. The Council’s failure to identify an alternative school placement and the delay in arranging suitable educational provision amounts to fault. This fault has caused Mrs X and Y an injustice.

Summary: Mr X complains on behalf of Mr Y, about delays in completing Mr Y’s financial assessment and issuing invoices, incorrect care charging, and failure to explain Mr Y’s care costs. We find

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a data breach by the Council. This is because this is a matter best considered by the Information Commissioner’s Office.