LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s alleged failure to issue bus passes Mr X applied for on behalf of his children. This is because the events complained about took place more than 12 months ago and it would have been reasonable for Mr X to refer them to us sooner.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his taxi licence renewal. We found fault by the Council. The Council has already remedied the personal injustice to Mr X, and it has made service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application for a development next to the complainant’s home. There is not enough evidence to conclude fault in the decision-making process is likely to have affected the outcome,

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about maintaining a grass verge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a summons and court fee for council tax arrears. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot investigate any issue that forms part of legal proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s noise nuisance investigation because we are unlikely to find fault and it is reasonable to expect the complainants to use their right of appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about who is liable to pay the council tax after a tenant moved out. This is because the complainant can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council’s Local Authority Designated Officer did not respond to allegations made against Mrs X within a timely manner. This is because an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint from a parish council about the Council not responding to its communication over four years ago. We cannot investigate complaints from public bodies.

Summary: Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council failed to make adequate education and special educational needs provision for the complainant’s son between September 2021 and the end of the school year in July 2022. So, he missed out on a significant amount of education and other provision detailed in his Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council will take the agreed action to remedy the injustice this fault caused.

Summary: Although the Council wrongly paid COVID-19 business support grants to the complainant’s business, under the circumstances we have not fault with this. Guidance from the Government also instructs councils to recover grants paid in error, and so the Council is also not at fault for doing so this in this case. There is no fault here, therefore, and so we have completed our investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled Ms X’s council tax account and her council tax reduction award. There has been no significant injustice and we could not achieve more by investigating the complaint now.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s substantiating concerns about Mr X’s care of a foster child. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a social worker giving Mr X permission to record a telephone call, then the Council substantiating a concern about him based on his doing so. Any fault by the Council is unlikely to have caused enough injustice to Mr X to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has demonstrated discriminatory and transphobic behaviour. This is because we would not achieve anything significant by doing so.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about poor quality work carried out on a property before Mrs X bought it from the Council. The courts are best placed to deal with claims for compensation due to negligence.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to carry out improvements to a pedestrian crossing near Miss X’s home. There is insufficient evidence of fault which warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a delay by the Council in notifying the complainant that his council tax reduction had ended. This is because the complainant has appealed to the Valuation Tribunal and because the impact is not significant enough to warrant an investigation.

Summary: It was not fault for the Council to suggest different ways in which Mr X might use his funded hours to achieve his desired outcomes.

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council wrongly assessed him as being liable to pay a contribution towards the costs of his care and support. He says he cannot afford to make the payment and needs the money to pay for medication that is not available on the NHS. We found no fault in the way the Council completed the financial assessment. So, there are no grounds to criticise its decision that Mr X should contribute towards the cost of his care.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the education provided to the complainant’s daughter. This is because we cannot consider complaints about schools.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s actions in relation to the care of her friend, Mr Y. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is late and I see no good grounds to consider it now. Some newer matters, whilst also late, have not yet completed the Council’s complaints procedure and so I have not considered them as part of this complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to take planning enforcement action over the conversion of two houses from domestic use to self-catering accommodation. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: Mr X complained about an invoice the Council sent for his mother (Mrs Y) ’s care and support charges. The Council was at fault for delays starting Mrs Y’s financial assessment and for failing to provide information or updates about the financial assessment process. However, the Council was not at fault for charging full fees when Mr X did not engage in the financial assessment. We cannot make any suitable or meaningful recommendations due to a lack of financial information.

Summary: There was delay by the Council in applying to court to end a care order which caused avoidable uncertainty and distress. The Council has taken some action to remedy the injustice to Mr X and his son Y and to improve its services, but it needs to make the additional payments set out in this statement.