LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a council tax summons and a Subject Access Request. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice and because the complainant can complain to the Information Commissioner.

Summary: Mrs complained that she was unaware of a Council Tax debt. There is no fault by the Council. Mrs X looked at the wrong account online which showed there was no debt. But, the Council had sent invoices and liability orders to the addresses it had on file.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to award priority banding on her housing application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about obstructive parking in front of the complainant’s gate. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide her child with an education, delayed issuing and reviewing an education, health and care plan, and handled her complaint poorly. Miss X said this meant her child’s needs were not met, they lost out on education, and it caused distress, frustration, and upset. We find the Council at fault, and this caused injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X, make an additional monthly payment for each month of delay reviewing the plan, and improve its service.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about proposed changes to the Council’s refuse collections. This is because the issue affects all or most residents in the Council’s area.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council initially refusing his blue badge application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, the claimed fault has not caused any significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’ complaint about the Council’s incorrect advice about the cost of her mother, Mrs Y’s care. The Council has apologised, offered £500 to remedy the injustice caused and taken steps to prevent recurrence of the fault. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the suitability of temporary accommodation provided by the Council to the complainant. This is because the complainant requested a review of the decision and now has a right of appeal to county court. There is no exceptional reason why she cannot exercise this right. We therefore have no legal jurisdiction to investigate this complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a prior approval application and associated building control matters. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council handled the application, and we are satisfied with the Council’s response to the building control issues.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful housing application. This is because the Council has re-opened the application and will reconsider it.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council taking court action over council tax arrears due to a change in benefits. We cannot investigate matters which have been subject to court proceedings. Mr X could appeal to the Valuation Tribunal about its decision on council tax reduction before it commences any new proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that she suffered injuries due to the Council’s failure to maintain a pavement it is responsible for. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs B to pursue her compensation claim by taking the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a planning application as there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to make a place available for the complainant’s son at an appropriate school. This is because investigation would not achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

Mr X complained about the Council’s refusal to provide school transport for his son (B) when the school named in his Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan) is the only school offered by the Council and is more than three miles from his home. Mr X also complained about the failure to properly consider his school transport appeal.

Summary: Mrs Z, on behalf of her father Mr X, complained the Council allowed a debt to accrue for adult social care services. The Council accepts fault in its failure to communicate with Mr X about the unpaid domiciliary care charges and allowing them to accrue to over £9,000. The Council has already taken action to provide a suitable remedy for this complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his concerns about a school’s complaint handling. This is because the complaint flows from the internal management of a school, which we have no jurisdiction to consider. The law says we cannot consider complaints about the actions of councils in relation to matters that are outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: Miss X complained about delays in the EHC Plan process and in issuing a final EHC plan which meant her son was unable to start school in September 2023. Miss X also complained her son is still not receiving an education or the provision specified in his EHC Plan. We find the delay in completing the EHC Needs Assessment and issuing a final Plan is fault. As was the failure to provide a full-time education. This fault has caused Miss X and her son an injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s housing application and his request for medical priority. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council set annual rent for a carpark. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to justify our involvement.

Summary: The Council’s failure to decide whether it owed Mr X a homelessness duty in 2022 was fault. It failed to recognise that he was homeless because of domestic abuse and failed to provide interim accommodation. The Council has agreed to apologise, backdate Mr X’s housing application, make a payment and act to improve its services.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council removed and destroyed his vehicle in error. This is because Mr X can take the matter to court. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider his complaints about personal information.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council responded to reports he made about a business premises. The Council has not fully investigated the matter and it would be reasonable for Mr X to allow it to do so. Nor will we consider Mr X’s claim for compensation, because we cannot achieve the outcome he is looking for here.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the suitability of the accommodation allocated to him to relieve his homelessness because that complaint is late. We will not investigate his complaint about the priority band on the housing register because there is insufficient evidence of fault.