LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to notify the complainant of the correct date for a funeral. This is because the Council will make a symbolic payment of £500.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed considering a complaint at stage two of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council has now agreed to resolve the complaint by issuing its stage two response without further delay. It will also apologise and offer to make a payment to the complainant to remedy the time and trouble they have been to.

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s administrative handling of her housing application. We found the Council at fault with failing to reinstate her application when it said it would, delays with a medical assessment, and not offering her a right of review of the outcome. This caused distress and frustration. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X, pay her a symbolic payment to recognise her injustice, and take action to prevent recurrence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful blue badge application. This is because the Council will offer the complainant another mobility assessment.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about how the Council decided to refuse her a Blue Badge. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s decision making.

Summary: We will use our discretion not to investigate this complaint about temporary accommodation because the complainant could have used her appeal rights.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her mother’s council tax account. She says the Council did not send council tax bills in a timely manner, failed to send the notice to the correct address, and did not follow the correct proceed to recover the debt. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and Miss Y has a right of appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals which it is reasonable to expect her to use.

During two earlier investigations, we identified that faults in the way the Council was operating its children’s statutory complaints procedure were potentially causing injustice to others. We opened this new complaint to investigate. We found that complainants have experienced delay, and in some cases, have been denied their right to access the full complaints procedure.

Summary: Miss B complained that the Council had failed to reimburse her for the cost of all her utility bills in her temporary accommodation and was trying to recover housing benefit debts from her. We have not investigated the utility payments any further because Ms B was aware of the arrangement by March 2022 and could have complained about it at that point. We have not investigated the housing benefit issues because she was aware of some of the debts in 2023 and had a right of appeal against them. However the Council failed to deal with her complaint properly causing her to complain to us.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s section 7 report for court because the law says we cannot investigate matters considered by a court. We will not consider the rest of Mr X’s complaints because they are late.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about matters related to the Council’s data handling. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to respond to Ms X’s complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the suitability of the Council’s final offer of accommodation after Ms X was homeless. It was reasonable for Ms X to use her statutory right of appeal to the county court, and it is open to her to request a late appeal.

Summary: We have upheld Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in accepting a main housing duty. The Council has agreed to take appropriate action to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council did not adequately consider her daughter, Miss Y’s needs or provide the support she needed. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault with how the Council considered Miss Y’s needs and decided she did not require social care support.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to approach the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then London Tribunals.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to deliver services to her child. She also complained about its complaint handling. We found the Council was at fault. Miss X did not have the opportunity to have her complaint properly considered via the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council will apologise to Miss X, make a symbolic payment to her, and complete the complaints procedure without further delay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s review of suitability of Miss X’s temporary accommodation. It was reasonable for her to appeal against the decision to the County Court if she wished to challenge it.

Summary: The Council was at fault for delays and poor communication regarding repair issues Ms X raised regarding her temporary accommodation. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Ms X to acknowledge the additional frustration and distress caused, beyond that already remedied through its complaint responses. It has also agreed to review its procedures for responding to repeated issues of disrepair in temporary accommodation and for communicating effectively with tenants about the issues.

Summary: There was no fault in the Council’s decision the complainant has accrued rent arrears for a temporary accommodation property. We have therefore completed our investigation.

Summary: Miss C complained that, after her son’s laptop broke, the Council refused to fund another one, despite the fact he did not have any other way to receive his online tutoring. The Council did not respond to her contacts and delayed arranging a school placement. We uphold the complaint, due to the Council not responding to Miss C’s contacts and delaying its consultation with schools. Miss C and her son experienced avoidable distress and her son missed education. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to remedy this injustice and to carry out a review.

Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about the Council-commissioned domiciliary care provided to Ms Y in October 2023. There is not a good reason for the delay in the matter being brought to us.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council disposing of her father’s pots and pans in error. This is because it is a complaint about negligence which is a legal matter for the courts to consider and decide. We cannot decide a negligence claim or award compensation in the way Ms X seeks.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s council tax liability. This is because the matter has already been considered in court, and because the complaint is late without good reasons to investigate it now.