LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to ensure his son, Y received an education or the specialist provision in his Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan since October 2023 while he was out of school. The Council was at fault as it failed to ensure Y received a suitable education in line with his EHC Plan between October 2023 and July 2024. The Council agreed to make payments to recognise the impact this had on Y’s education and for the distress and uncertainty caused to Mr X.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s response to her complaint about an accumulation of refuse at a neighbouring property as I do not consider Ms X is caused a significant level of injustice to justify our further involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the permanent exclusion of the complainant’s daughter from school. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the application date used by the Council when determining the complainant’s Right to Buy application. There is insufficient evidence of administrative fault by the Council, and it is reasonable to expect the complainant to use the alternative court remedy available to him.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the outcome of the occupational therapy assessment. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to investigate his report of unauthorised development that overlooked and reduced privacy to his home. We found no evidence of fault in how the Council handled Mr X’s report of a breach of planning control.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about disrepair and the housing register. This is because part of the complaint is late and because we cannot investigate complaints about a council when it is acting as a landlord.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to approve a street party. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a ‘right to buy’ application. Mrs X could reasonably have taken court action. It is unlikely we could reach a clear enough view on matters concerning the ‘right to buy’ application. It is more appropriate for the Information Commissioner and Tribunal to consider the alleged breach of the Freedom of Information Act.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed providing her with an update following a care needs assessment. Ms X also complained the Council did not do anything after she told it she needed support at home. Ms X says the Council’s actions caused her avoidable worry and distress and contributed to a decline in her mental and physical health. We found fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and carry out a further needs assessment.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of missed bin collections and its response to the complainant.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council named a mainstream school on her son, Y’s, Education, Health and Care Plan and ignored her request for a special school. Ms X also complained the Council’s communication with her was very poor and it delayed responding to her complaint. We found the Council delayed consulting a special school for three months and responding to Ms X’s complaint. The Council will apologise to Ms X and pay her a symbolic amount of £300 to recognise the frustration this caused her.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that Ms X’s vehicle was towed away without proper notice as it is reasonable to expect the complainant to appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement in matters relating to multiple issues with a property he lets to tenants. We have not seen enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. And we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking. Also, it is reasonable to expect Mr X to complain to the Information Commissioner if he believes the Council is withholding information.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the administrative charge the Council made to Ms X for her car parking permit refund. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We found fault in the way the Council communicated with the complainant (Miss X) as well as in the Council’s record keeping and complaint handling. This fault caused Miss X injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise, provide some information to Miss X on her housing options and make symbolic payments. The Council has also agreed to carry out some service improvements.

Summary: Miss Y complained the Council mishandled her housing application and offered her unsuitable accommodation. Miss Y said the Council’s actions have been draining, upsetting and stressful. We have found no fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the actions taken by the Council after she reported an incident in a park. Further investigation would achieve nothing more.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed completing her child’s phased transfer annual review process. As a result, Ms X’s appeal rights were delayed and she could not challenge her child’s secondary school placement until several months after she should have been able to. We found the Council at fault for delaying consulting with schools and producing a final Education, Health and Care Plan for the child’s phased transfer to secondary school. We also found the Council at fault for not issuing an amended Education, Health and Care Plan after an annual review in 2023. To remedy the injustic

Summary: Ms B complained about the Council’s actions in carrying out two reviews of her housing benefit claim in two successive years. We have not found fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mrs X’s application for council tax support as she can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal regarding its decision. There is insufficient evidence of fault causing Mrs X a significant injustice from the ancillary matters she complains about to justify our further involvement, and it is unlikely we could achieve any meaningful outcome by investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council holding him liable for business rates because the court has confirmed his company’s liability and Mr X would have to apply to the court to set aside the liability order. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not responding to his email disputing liability because I cannot say, on balance, that this caused Mr X significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to act against an alleged breach of planning control. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to provide Mr X with home insulation in his flat. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation and we cannot achieve the outcome he seeks.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to grant consent for a dropped kerb. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.