LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mr X and Mrs Y complain about the Council’s decision to build a new footpath/cycleway to create a new right of way on open green land near to their properties causing a nuisance. We found no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered these matters. So, we have completed our investigation.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions. The matters complained of are not separable from matters concerning the residence of and contact with Mr X’s child. This has been subject to court proceedings and Mr X also has a right to return to court it would be reasonable to use.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a child’s education and Special Educational Needs provision. This is because this matter is currently part of ongoing court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that a Council owned tree has damaged his property. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim at court, which is in the best position to decide the matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about enforcement of a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and there is not significant enough injustice to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Mr B complained the Council failed to sufficiently support his business both when refusing a grant to support the business during the COVID-19 pandemic and more generally. We do not uphold the complaint finding no fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his reports of rats and fly tipping. We have decided to uphold Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is evidence of fault by the Council, which caused Mr X uncertainty about what action it would take. To remedy this, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X, open a new investigation into his reports and make several service improvements.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her son being removed from her care and contact with him being stopped, because it lies outside our jurisdiction. The law prevents us from investigating complaints about matters that are being considered and decided in court. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her son having bruises in his foster care placement. This is because there is nothing we could add to the Council’s previous investigation on this.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s closure of a road which affected Mrs X’s business parking. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the accuracy of a children services assessment report. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to issue another car park season ticket. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: A housing association, acting on behalf of the Council, delayed making necessary changes to Ms X’s housing application. This is fault. The Council is also at fault because it failed to keep records in line with its data retention policy. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Ms X £300, and take action to improve its service.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint the Council is placing her grandchild for adoption without contact with her. We cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X wants and cannot investigate court decisions.

Summary: Miss B complains the Council did not properly consider her request for a discretionary disregard of the value of her grandfather’s home in its financial assessment. Miss B says the Council has not taken into account the level of time she spent and sacrifices she made to care for her grandparents, or that she gave up her home to do so. The Ombudsman does not find fault in how the Council considered Miss B’s request.

Summary: Mrs and Mrs X complained the Council unfairly reduced their adoption support payments after their eldest adopted child moved out and was accommodated by a neighbouring local authority. They also complained the Council has failed to provide them with respite care. There was no fault in how the Council decided to reduce their support payments. There was fault with its respite provision as it has not offered them respite in line with an agreed adoption support package. It will apologise, pay them £200 to acknowledge the frustration and uncertainty caused and confirm how it will provide t

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about Mrs X’s suitability to supervise or care for a child in her family. This matter is not separable from court action.