LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint that a Council officer targeted Councillor X during a meeting. This is because Councillor X is not complaining as a member of the public and so the complaint falls outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not backdating a discretionary housing payment. This is because the Council has now agreed to backdate the payment.

Summary: Ms X complained about how the Council dealt with social work assessments for her son, and how it dealt with her complaints about the matter. As a result she says she and her son have not received the support they need and she has incurred costs in providing a report. We find that the Council carried out the latest social work assessment properly. There was some fault in earlier assessments which was unlikely to have affected the outcome. We recommend that the Council remind relevant staff across all social work teams of the need to consider and record whether the child involved in an

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council dealt with parking issues near his home. We have found the Council to be at fault because of delay, poor communication and complaint handling. To remedy the injustice to Mr X, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to him, review the parking situation without delay and make service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on Mr X’s application for council tax support as he can appeal against it to the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council not releasing information to her. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre.

Mr G says the Council failed to properly consider the representations he made on a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) it issued for a car registered to him.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained about delays in reviewing their daughter’s Education Health and Care plan and how it investigated their complaints. The Council properly investigated Mr and Mrs X’s complaints. However, it did not properly apologise or recognise the impact on them of the failures it accepted. The Council agreed to apologise fully, pay Mr and Mrs X an improved financial remedy and review how it manages statutory children’s complaints.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s investigation into whether a landlord was a fit and proper person to operate a house in multiple occupation. This is because Mr X has not been caused an injustice as a result of the actions of the Council.

Summary: The Council was at fault for the way it handled Mr X’s reports about the condition of a pathway and his subsequent complaint about this. This caused Mr X injustice as the condition of the pathway meant people were unable to access the tennis courts he ran a business from. In addition, he spent time and trouble pursuing the complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X, make a payment to him for the distress caused, consider what went wrong in this case and investigate Mr X’s more recent concerns about the pathway.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application next door to the complainant’s house. This is because the complainant has not been caused significant injustice because of any fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has not provided the complainant with a suitable home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council did not provide appropriate support to meet her child, Y’s, needs. She said it also did not complete a parent carer assessment with her and about poor complaint handling. There was no fault in how the Council assessed Y’s needs and decided they were not eligible for social support. However, it failed to refer them for a mentor as agreed, did not complete an adequate parent carer assessment with Ms X and delayed investigating her complaint. The Council will offer to refer Y for a mentor if still appropriate, complete a parent carer assessment with Ms X and p

Summary: The Council is at fault for delaying consideration of this complaint at stage two of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council has agreed to start a stage two investigation by allocating the complaint to an Independent Investigator within a month.

Summary: Ms A complains the Council failed to provide the provision in Child X’s Educational Health and Care plan. Ms A complains this means her son has missed education and support he should have been receiving. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for failing to provide the agreed provision, and for failing to provide suitable alternative provision in the interim. The Council has agreed to provide a financial remedy in recognition of the lost provision and distress caused. The Council has also agreed to consider service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s complaint response concerning a subject access request. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed and also because we are unlikely to achieve anything more.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice as it has been cancelled by the Council and there is insufficient remaining injustice caused to the complainant to warrant our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about noise nuisance. This is because the Council’s investigation has not been completed yet. So, it is too early to consider the complaint in detail.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s delay responding to his freedom of information request. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to complain to the Information Commissioner.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.