LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Ms D complains the Council repeatedly failed to collect her household waste. We have upheld the complaint, because the Council has failed to evidence how it monitored Ms D’s case and completed the investigation. The Council has agreed to create written procedures for monitoring missed waste collections.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the room availability at Mr X’s local library. This is because an investigation is unlikely to result in a worthwhile outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her data. This is because it is better dealt with by the Information Commissioner's Office.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage to Miss X’s car. 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 Miss X to take her claim for damage to court.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council has not dealt properly with a planning application near his home. The Council is not at fault.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to reduce Ms Y’s care package after it was temporarily increased. The Council was at fault for increasing the package without telling Ms Y, in how it decided to increase the package, for delay reviewing it and delay progressing obtaining a hoist for Ms Y. This caused Ms Y distress and meant she paid for care she did not need. The Council will reimburse Ms Y the extra money she paid during this time and issue staff reminders.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a vehicle crossover installed by Council contractors. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

this complaint about the Council’s failure to maintain highway gullies near Mr X’s home. There is insufficient evidence of significant personal injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: Mrs Y complained about failures and delays by the Council in arranging her daughter, Ms Z’s college placement and transport to and from college. as set out in her Education Health and Care Plan. We have found fault by the Council, causing delays, in the period from 5 September to 7 October. We have also found fault by the Council in the period from 10 October to 7 December in its communications about the transport requirements. We have not found this fault caused a further delay with Ms Z’s transport. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice these faults caused by apologising to

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the care provided to her mother, Ms Y. This is because an investigation by the Ombudsmen would be unlikely to identify fault by the organisations involved in some aspects of Ms Y’s care. With regards to other parts of the Ms Y’s care, an investigation by the Ombudsmen would be unlikely to add anything to the investigations already carried out by the organisations Miss X is complaining about.

Summary: The Council failed to properly consider medical information when assessing Mr X’s application for a blue badge.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult safeguarding. There is not enough evidence of fault causing significant injustice. We cannot achieve the outcome the complainant wants for the Council to confirm there was no finding of abuse or neglect, because the safeguarding investigation is continuing.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s communication with the complainant as the matter has been remedied and there is insufficient injustice to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s recovery of unpaid council tax including threats of court action and committal to prison. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s policy on the installation of dropped kerbs which led to it refusing Mr X’s application in 2018. This is because the part of the complaint which relates to Mr X’s own application is a late complaint and so falls outside our jurisdiction and because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council in relation to current implementation of its dropped kerb policy.

Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint about assisted bin collections. This is because the Council has said it will investigate further and reintroduce monitoring, and there is little more we could add to this at present.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to properly deal with her reports of Japanese Knotweed spreading from a neighbouring property into her garden. We have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered these matters and so have completed our investigation.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint further. It is not clear Mrs X has given consent to the complaint on her behalf.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council charged for home care services without his agreement or carrying out a financial assessment. The Council also continued to send him invoices for care services he had cancelled. We have found the Council to be at fault. We are satisfied Mr X would not have agreed to receive the care package had the Council acted correctly. To remedy the injustice to Mr X, the Council has agreed to apologise, cancel all outstanding care charges, make a symbolic payment and review its practices.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about falsifying court documents as the matter complained of formed part of court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a warning letter sent to the complainant about her behaviour at a library. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. An investigation is unlikely to establish whether the Council acted with fault, and the injustice caused by the warning letter is not significant enough to justify our continued involvement in the case.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s enforcement investigation. This is because the complainant has not been caused significant injustice.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission to their neighbour. They also complained about its decision not to take enforcement action when they reported a breach of planning control once the works began. There was no fault in how the Council considered these decisions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a relief road proposal. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The alleged fault has not yet caused the complainant a significant injustice, we cannot achieve the outcome she is seeking, and the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider concerns about access to information.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application submitted by the complainant’s neighbour. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence to suggest fault by the Council has affected the planning outcome.