LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a possible breach of planning control. This is because it is not yet possible to determine if the complainant has suffered significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about financial support provided to him as a Special Guardian because the complaint is late and there is no good reason to our exercise discretion. There is also no evidence the Council is at fault for offering different support to foster and kinship carers.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to undertake actions agreed during its complaints process regarding a development near the complainant’s home. Any injustice caused to the complainant by the alleged faults is not significant enough to justify our continued involvement.

Summary: There was no fault in the way the Council has handled a planning enforcement matter. We have therefore completed our investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council delayed naming a school on a child’s Education Health and Care Plan. This is because it is reasonable to have expected the complainant to have used their appeal to a tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to act when he informed it about a dangerous structure in 2022. This is because the complaint is made late and I see no good reason why Mr X could not have complained sooner.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council delayed installing a dropped kerb that allows wheelchair access to the road. This is because the Council has now provided the access.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about damage to his car. This is because it does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to go to court to determine the Council’s liability for the damage to his car.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to deal with reports of breaches of planning control and failure to communicate with the complainant. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions and the complainant has not suffered a significant personal injustice, to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about damage caused to his carpet. This is because this is a complaint about negligence which is a legal matter for the courts to consider and decide.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to relocate a tree it has planted on Council-maintained land in front of her property. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not buying them pain relief. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider her complaint whilst there are ongoing court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a leak from the bathroom funded by a Disabled Facilities Grant. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: the Council agreed to amend Ms P’s son B’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. It issued a final amended Plan 16 weeks after the annual review meeting. This was 4 weeks late. As B was not attending school, this compounds the injustice caused by the delay. The Council has agreed a symbolic remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s allocation of housing to a homeless applicant in 2023. It was reasonable for Miss X to ask for a review of suitability when the property was offered.

Summary: Ms Y has two sons who both have Education, Health and Care plans in place. Ms Y complained the Council has failed to implement the provision in either plan, and the Council accepted this to be true. We found the Council at fault and recommended the Council apologise, make a payment in acknowledgement of the injustice caused, and make service improvements.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decisions or its assessments about Mrs Y’s care and support needs. This is because the matter is being considered by the Court of Protection and the law will not allow us to consider a complaint where court action has already started.

Summary: Ms X complained about how the Council rejected her application for a disabled parking bay outside her home. There was fault in how the Council considered Ms X’s application. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X for the distress this caused and review its decision. It also agreed to review its disabled parking bay policy to ensure it allows the Council to consider individual circumstances in each case.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the care her late father received at two nursing homes. It is reasonable for her to seek a legal remedy in the courts.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse her council tax support. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect Ms X to use her legal right to appeal to the specialist Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax. The Council is not responsible for the alleged error on the valuation list. There is no fault in the Council billing in line with that list. We would not achieve a refund of Mr X’s current council tax. Mr X’s concerns about refuse collection and road maintenance should complete the Council’s complaint procedure before we will consider them.

Summary: The Council did not properly record its decision-making when deciding Mr B’s school transport appeals and it failed to provide sufficient detail in its decision letters. There was fault in the way the Council recorded its decision-making. Because of this, Mr B suffered uncertainty. The Council will apologise to Mr B, train staff, and offer Mr B a fresh appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to consider his complaint further whilst there are ongoing court proceedings. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr X, who is street homeless, complained that he missed out on an offer of housing when the Council amended his email address on its computer system. To remedy the injustice caused the Council agreed to apologise to Mr X and make a payment to acknowledge the distress he experienced.