LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: The Council delayed carrying out an Education, Health, and Care needs assessment and issuing an EHC plan for Mr X’s child, Y which caused distress to the family. We are satisfied with the service improvements already being carried out by the Council to resolve this issue. The Council will apologise and make a payment to recognise the personal injustice to Mr X and Y.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that he is not eligible to receive council tax support. This is because Mr X has appeal rights to the Valuation Tribunal against the decision which places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about meeting adult social care needs. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council has assessed how best to meet the person’s care needs. The person disagrees with the decision and wants a different provision, but the Ombudsman cannot question or criticise the decision when there is not fault in the decision-making process.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council restricting his contact with his grandchild or that it stopped him from becoming their connected carer. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council considered his complaint to justify our involvement. The Council has accepted there were delays in its complaint handling. It has agreed to pay Mr X £200 to remedy any injustice caused. Further investigation by the Ombudsman would not be proportionate.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has declined to reimburse her for the cost of therapies she sourced privately to ensure the delivery of the provision set out in her son, Y’s, Education Health and Care Plan. We have found fault by the Council with the annual review process, review of therapies provision and handling of Mrs X’s complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a financial payment to remedy the injustice caused to Mrs X.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council placed her family in unsuitable accommodation and delayed addressing her complaint. We find fault which caused Ms X avoidable inconvenience, distress and frustration. The Council should apologise and make symbolic payments to Ms X to reflect the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about bush cutting by the Council in Ms X’s road. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Ms X to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Mrs F complained the Council has failed to deal with, and respond to, her complaints of anti-social behaviour and noise nuisance issues from her neighbours. We find fault with how the Council handled Mrs F’s complaints and it failed to respond to her request to activate the community trigger in a timely manner. It also failed to explore what reasonable adjustments she required. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms X’s accommodation. It is reasonable to expect Ms X to ask the Council for a suitability review and to use her right to go 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 and so we cannot question the panel’s decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s council tax band. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a penalty charge notice. This is because the Council has agreed to cover the cost of the penalty charge and this provides a suitable remedy for Miss X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because the complainant can use the statutory process and appeal to the tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to provide the complainant with an opportunity to pay a parking fine at the discounted rate. This is because the complainant has a right of appeal to court which can provide her with the remedy she seeks.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking permit and a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because we are satisfied by the actions taken by the Council to remedy the complaint and it is unlikely we would find fault relating to the Penalty Charge Notice.

Summary: Ms D complains about planning permission for an advertising sign near her home. She says the Council also failed to assess if there is a statutory nuisance. The Ombudsman has completed the investigation and upheld the complaint because the Council accepts there was a failure to assess the statutory nuisance issue. It has offered to carry out a new assessment.

Summary: Mrs B complains about the way an admissions appeal panel considered her appeal. Mrs B says the panel did not properly consider her appeal, which was the same as a previous appeal for her other daughter for the same school, which was successful. Mrs B says her daughter now attends a school that is less suited to her needs and feels discriminated against. There was fault in how the panel considered the appeal. A further appeal with a new panel is satisfactory remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing to let Mrs X buy her Council house. It would be reasonable for Mrs X to use her right to go to court.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint that she was prevented from paying a penalty charge notice at the discounted rate of £65. This is because the complaint is late and the fault Ms X alleges did not cause the injustice she claims.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly pursued recovery action against him while his council tax appeal was ongoing. There were delays in the Council’s processes which caused Mr X avoidable distress. However, the Council had already apologised to Mr X, and this was sufficient to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: there was fault by the Council in the form of poor communication and delayed action following a decision taken by a panel in October 2021 regarding proposed minor adaptations to her property. This caused injustice to Ms B and the Council will take the action identified to remedy this

Summary: Miss B complains the Council failed to assess both her and her grandchildren when they came to stay with her. Miss B has had no support to help her care for her two young grandchildren, causing her financial distress and frustration. We find fault with the Council for failing to follow the relevant procedures and for not carrying out an assessment. The Council have proposed a way to remedy the complaint which we agree with.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to appeal to London Tribunals.