LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with a complaint about the conduct of a councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the cost of adult social care. The Council failed to explain why the reablement team was involved in this case and to clarify that it was not free. The Council also delayed completing its financial assessment and confirming the costs of the care. It has apologised for the upset and confusion and waived £100 from the bill. We are satisfied with the actions it has taken to acknowledge the impact of its fault. If there was no fault the full bill would be due.

Summary: Miss C complained on behalf of her father, Mr D that the Council had not provided clear and transparent information about the likely level of the contribution he would have to make towards his care charges before he agreed to a care package and then delayed in completing the financial assessment. We found the Council did not provide clear enough information about the likely level of the contribution and took 12 weeks to confirm the amount, causing a large debt to build up. The Council has agreed to pay £1000 to Mr D which can be offset against the outstanding amount, to agree an affor

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that he suffered injuries after tripping on a road. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to remove all fly tipped vegetation which has been left near the complainant’s allotment. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

Summary: Miss D says the Council repeatedly missed waste collections at her home. We have found evidence of fault by the Council and upheld the complaint. We completed the investigation because the Council agrees to take action including paying Miss D redress.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not providing him with bin collections from his new property and expecting him to present his bins in an adjacent street for collection. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making on how to provide its bin collections to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We cannot investigate Ms B’s complaint about the Council removing her garden fence in response to the concerns of one of its tenants. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about the management of social housing by a council acting as a social landlord.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s use of a hotel for temporary homeless accommodation. There is insufficient evidence of fault or personal injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s use of a hotel for temporary homeless accommodation. There is insufficient evidence of fault or personal injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to concerns raised by Mr X about the activities of a neighbour. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr X sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action against a flytipper. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for a site next to the complainant’s home. Both the planning officer and committee considered the relevant legislation, the objections received and the impact on Mr X’s home. It decided to approve the application. Without fault in the process, this is a decision the Council is entitled to make.

Mr and Mrs X complain about how the Council handled their daughter, S’s, Education, Health and Care Plan provision. They say it delayed putting provision in place to ensure S’s needs were met. This meant that S was left with little educational and therapeutic provision for longer than necessary. Mr and Mrs X would like the Council to apologise for the delays and pay them for the distress its actions have caused. We found the Council was at fault for the delays in the assessment process. The Council agreed to our recommendations and will address the injustice its actions caused to Mr and Mrs X

Summary: We found no fault on Mr B’s complaint about the Council failing to help him after it removed his vehicle from the public highway. The Council’s actions did not cause his homelessness. It correctly carried out a homeless assessment, decided it owed him the Relief Duty, and offered to refer him to support.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a Blue Badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to only supply a moulded seat for his child, rather than replacing the whole seat. Mr X also complains the Council has refused to reimburse him for the new chair he purchased privately. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of refuse collection. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mrs X’s housing application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Summary: There was a delay in completing a financial assessment which caused avoidable confusion, uncertainty and the shock of a large first bill. The Council has already reduced the bill and apologised, which is a partial remedy. It will offer a repayment plan and ensure there are enough staff to complete financial assessments without delay.

Summary: Ms C complains the Council placed her mother in law, Mrs D in a care home rated “inadequate” by the Care Quality Commission where she went onto receive poor care. The Council is not at fault for the lack of choice in the care home; however the care home failed to properly assess Mrs D and its records are incomplete. To remedy the complaint the Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs D and Ms C and make symbolic payments to acknowledge the uncertainty caused by these failures. Through its commissioning role it will also review the care home’s record keeping, falls policy and how staff a

Summary: We ended the investigation because it is reasonable for Mr X to go to court about money he believes Mrs Y should not have paid to the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing a request from Mr X because of a dispute about whether he has already provided evidence of his address. The matter complained of concerns the processing of data and the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed than us to consider it.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to take action against his neighbour’s tall fence. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision‑making, nor sufficient personal injustice caused to Mr X by the matter, to justify an investigation.