LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. It was reasonable for Miss X to appeal to an independent adjudicator and it is reasonable for her to file a Witness Statement to the Traffic Enforcement Centre. There is insufficient evidence of fault or injustice in the other matters she raised.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council failing to register a tree preservation order (TPO) for a plot of land near her property, and enforcement officers not visiting the site for 12 days after her report of the trees’ removal. There is insufficient significant personal injustice caused by the matters complained of to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that a Council employee was abusive to Mr X during a telephone call. This is because any remaining injustice caused to Mr X is not sufficient to justify our involvement and we cannot achieve the outcome he seeks.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to provide her son with a full-time suitable education meaning he missed out on education and affected his mental and physical health. The Council failed to evidence why it was in Ms X’s son’s best interest to only receive 12 hours per week and it failed to promptly review this and put additional provision in place. A suitable remedy is agreed.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the actions and behaviour of a social worker during child protection enquiries. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, an investigation would not lead to any worthwhile outcomes as we are not likely to make any findings on some of the matters complained about.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care. This is because it is a late complaint. But even if it were not, the Ombudsman would not add to actions already taken to recognise the impact on the family and to improve future service. The person using the service has died so we can provide no personal remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the cost of adult social care respite breaks. The Council told the complainant there was a cost for respite, and that the person using the service was responsible to pay the full costs of their care. There was a failure to send an updated care plan, and a small delay in invoicing for the respite, but these errors do not cause a significant injustice to warrant further investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s alleged failure to provide adequate provision when local transport in Mr X’s area was temporarily stopped. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to lead to a worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

Summary: Miss D complained about the Council’s handling of her homeless application which meant she lived in unsuitable accommodation. She said, as a result, she experienced distress and uncertainty. The Council accepted it was at fault as it had a duty to provide Miss D with interim accommodation from February to December 2023. We found it also failed to issue its housing decisions giving her appeal rights, communicated poorly, and failed to respond to her complaint. The Council agreed to apologise to Miss D and make payment to remedy the injustice its faults caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Mrs X’s report of safeguarding concerns at her son’s nursery in 2018 and the accuracy of its more recent assessment of her family. Part of the complaint is late and we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to obtain an adequate Occupational Therapy report in its assessment of a child’s special educational needs. This is a matter where the complainant has a right of appeal to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council approved a planning application without adequately addressing his objections about loss of light and overshadowing. We do not find fault with the Council causing a significant personal injustice to Mr X.

Summary: Ms Y complains about the Council’s failure to make suitable educational provision available for her daughter, W. Some parts of the complaint are outside of our jurisdiction. We find the Council is at fault for not making the necessary provision available in late 2019 and early 2020. The Council also failed to arrange and fund a speech and language assessment which the Council agreed was necessary to help inform the provision in W’s Education Health and Care Plan. The Council will reimburse the cost of the assessment, apologise for the failure to make provision available and make a tot

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a missing headstone. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is no evidence the Council is at fault.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to tell her when her free care package ended. Mrs X also complained the Council has charged a management fee as well the care charges. We found fault with the Council. The Council has already removed the management fee which addressed the fault and injustice caused.

Summary: We do not uphold Ms X’s complaint the Council did not properly assess her care needs or financial contribution between May 2020 and November 2021. The Council carried out care needs assessments and put in place a care and support plan until Ms X asked for this to be suspended. The Council could not calculate Ms X’s personal contribution (charge) because she did not provide the necessary financial information. There was therefore no fault because the Council took all the steps it could to calculate the charge, but it could not complete the process without Ms X’s co-operation.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council not thoroughly investigating concerns about a social worker. The matters complained of are not separable from matters that form part of court proceedings.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained the Council failed to carry out the recommendations it identified during its response to their complaint about the way the Council assessed their children’s needs. The Council accepted it was at fault in how it managed some of Mr and Mrs X’s case. There was no fault in how the Council made the service improvements it identified.

Summary: We ended out investigation because the wrong council responded to Ms X’s complaint. Ms X needs to use all stages of the correct Council’s complaints procedure (Council B). If she is not happy with Council’s B’s final complaint response, she can complain to us.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide her child with suitable education since November 2021. The Council is taking court proceedings against Mrs X for Y’s lack of attendance at her educational setting. Since the matters complained about are inextricably linked to matters considered in the court proceedings it is not suitable for us to investigate this matter further. I have used our general discretion to end the investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to allow Mrs X to apply to its housing register. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to pay the complainant’s legal fees. A court of law is the suitable body to decide liability for financial loss. It is not unreasonable to the complainant to seek a legal remedy in court.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint about how the Council managed restrictions placed upon the complainants social media account. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint by providing a proportionate remedy any injustice caused to the complainant.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not properly assess his needs before refusing his application for a disabled facilities grant to provide a second exit to his property. There was no fault in the way the Council assessed Mr X’s needs and made its decision.

Summary: The Council’s failure to consider relevant information in deciding Ms X did not qualify to join the housing register was fault. The Council was also at fault for failing to complete a medical needs assessment in line with its allocations policy. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Ms X £300, reassess Ms X’s application, and take action to improve its service.