LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about contact arrangements. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing a significant injustice. The Information Commissioner is better placed to deal with concerns about data protection matters.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s issue of a parking permit renewal reminder. This is because the Council has cancelled the penalty charge notices it issued Mr X for parking without a valid permit and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more for him.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a missing social services record as it is best dealt with by the Information Commissioner’s Office and the courts.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the care arrangements for his grandchild. This is because the matter has been subject to court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discharge its homelessness duty following Ms X’s refusal of an offer of alternative interim accommodation. It was reasonable for Ms X to use the review/appeal procedure for challenging the Council’s decision.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council fined him for littering when it could have issued him with a warning instead. We find no fault in the Council’s actions. We do not uphold Mr X’s complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice and the Council’s approach to enforcement. This is because the complainant can appeal to the tribunal about any fine he disagrees with.

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint that her child was unlawfully taken into care. The law prevents us from investigating complaints about the start of court action or what happened in court.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about damage caused to her wall during a waste collection in late 2024. This is because it is reasonable to expect Miss X to take the matter to court.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s historic complaint about the Council’s decision to allow her mother to have contact with her when she was a child in its care. This is because we could not carry out a full, fair and effective investigation of the matter now due to the very significant passage of time since the events complained about.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the priority the Council awarded on its housing register because there is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the housing priority awarded to Ms Y. Ms X, on behalf of Ms Y, started court action so we do not have discretion to investigate the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about alleged fault in the Council’s handling of a homelessness application, including delays and poor service. This is because the Council has agreed to provide a suitable remedy which is proportionate to the injustice caused. We cannot investigate or remedy the allegation that delays also resulted in his homelessness being relieved much later than it should have been. This is because the complainant had a right of appeal over this issue which he could reasonably have exercised.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s actions when he approached it as homeless in February 2024. We find fault in the Council’s poor communication, failure to complete a personalised housing plan, failure to decide if it owed him the main housing duty, and delay handling his complaint. This caused Mr X distress and uncertainty. The Council has already offered an apology and payment which is appropriate for the injustice caused.

Ms D complained the Council failed to carry out an occupational therapy assessment when her son, Mr J, transferred from children’s to adult’s social care services. We have found the Council significantly delayed completing an occupational therapy assessment. This delay caused Ms D avoidable frustration, uncertainty and distress. It affected the housing priority afforded to the household, creating significant uncertainty about whether Ms D missed suitable housing opportunities. The delay also means the household will live in accommodation that poses risks to their wellbeing for longer than they

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a safeguarding referral. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about parking enforcement on match days. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of noise nuisance and alleged licence breach at a pub near the complainant’s home. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and an investigation would not achieve a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a housing scheme application. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to reduce a package of care including direct payments to Mr X to assist with his children’s care needs. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify an investigation, and it would not achieve anything worthwhile now.

herefore the Ombudsman cannot question the merits of its decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about problems the complainant has experienced when using a parking payment app/system. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax arrears and costs. This is because the Council has removed the costs.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council sharing Miss X’s personal information. The Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to deal with complaints about data protection. If we considered the complaint, we could not achieve a higher financial remedy than the Council has already offered, and the courts are best placed to consider compensation claims.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s homelessness decisions. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to have used his court appeal rights.