LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about Council’s proposal to move her mother, Mrs Y, to another residential care home placement. It is unlikely we would find enough evidence of fault with the Council’s actions to warrant us investigating further. Other bodies are also better placed to make decisions about whether Mrs Y needs nursing care and what action is in her best interests.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the quality of care in a care home. There is insufficient evidence of fault in some areas of complaint, and insufficient evidence of injustice in others, to warrant investigation by the Ombudsman.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about missed garden waste collections. This is because there is insufficient evidence that the issue has caused the complainant a significant enough injustice to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about delays in the Council completing the stage three review panel under the children statutory complaints procedure. This is because the Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to adequately facilitate an independent review panel meeting regarding a permanent exclusion from school. She also complained the Council failed to produce adequate minutes of the meeting. Ms X said the Council’s actions negatively affected the family’s mental health. We found fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to provide an apology, a financial remedy and a copy of the notes taken at the meeting.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to charge her for an administrative task. There is no significant injustice and we cannot achieve what she is looking for.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s involvement with her child. The law prevents us from investigating anything that is or has been the subject of court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate X’s complaint about how the Council handled her request to reduce the speed limit on a local road. This is because the Council has already agreed it will review the speed limit of the road and further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council processed a planning application. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation. Also, we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because the courts are better placed to consider the matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with an application for a certificate of lawfulness of proposed use or development. This is because we are unlikely to find fault and the complainant has not suffered significant injustice.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint that the Council is wasting public money. This is because this issue affects all or most of the people in the Council’s area.

We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint that the Council overlooked his bids for housing because he cannot work. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mrs X complained about a Council decision to charge Mr Y the full costs of his care and support. This caused distress and financial hardship. She said the Council accepted it made an error, but did not fully refund Mr Y or acknowledge the impact of its actions. We did not find fault in the Council’s consideration of Mrs X’s complaint and or in the amount it refunded to Mr Y.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement matter. This is because the injustice caused to Mr X is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s online planning system and how it dealt with a planning application. This is because the complainant has not suffered significant injustice.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to secure the special educational provision her in daughter, W’s, Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan. The Council was at fault. To remedy their injustice, the Council will apologise to Mrs X and pay her £1400. It will arrange speech and language therapy provision for W. Lastly, the Council will review why it delayed reassessing W’s needs for her EHC Plan and issue a staff reminder.

Summary: There was fault in the way the Council carried out a safeguarding enquiry into concerns about a care home. This meant there is uncertainty of what would have happened if the enquiry had been carried out differently. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay a symbolic financial remedy and review its practice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered a planning application. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about charges for adult social care. There is not enough evidence of fault or significant injustice to justify our involvement. It is also unlikely we would add to what the Council said or reach a different outcome.

Summary: Mr Y complained about the Council’s delay in telling his late mother, Mrs Z, about her care charges and that it calculated her charges incorrectly. The Council was at fault for significant delay. There was no fault in the way it calculated the care charges. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr Y and make a payment to acknowledge the frustration and uncertainty he was caused. It has also agreed to review the way its finance and social work teams communicate to prevent similar delays in future.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not tell her about later planning applications for a neighbouring development, after it refused planning permission for the first application. This meant Mrs X missed the chance to object to the redesigned scheme.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her reports of damp, mould and high humidity in her rented property, nor its failure to protect her from harassment by her landlord. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a telegraph pole installed near the complainant’s home. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about parking enforcement and the Council’s response to his request for documents. The Council has explained to Mr X how it enforces the parking restrictions and sent Mr X the requested documents. There is insufficient evidence of fault and an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.