LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant cannot join the housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council 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 the Council’s involvement in Ms X’s child’s case. The law prevents us investigating what happens as part of court proceedings, and we have no power to change the court’s decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about the Council’s actions concerning the transition of Mr X and Ms Y’s child. There is no good reason to exercise the discretion available for us to do so.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing to renew the complainant’s parking permit after it had expired. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to determine a retrospective planning application. And the decision not to act against a failure to comply with an Enforcement Notice. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered a planning application for a site close to the complainant’s property. 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 including incorrect information in a safeguarding report. Further investigation will not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to replace wooden posts on a grass verge close to his home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Mrs D complained the Council did not complete an Education, Health and Care needs assessment for her child within legal timeframes. She also complained the Council failed to provide alternative provision support for them when they stopped attending school. We found the Council at fault for not properly considering its duties for alternative provision. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council failed to provide financial support to her between 2011 and 2016 when she began caring for a child family member and obtained a Residence Order. This is because the complaint is late, and there are no good reasons Mrs X could not have complained sooner.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s reduction in the amount it offered for the purchase of the complainant’s property. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The complaint is late, and we have seen no good reason why the complainant could not have complained to us much sooner.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about scaffolding because the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council failed to pay him £100 it offered following problems with his household waste collection service. This is because the Council has agreed to pay the original amount offered plus an extra £100. This is an appropriate remedy for the identified injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council delayed in progressing his homeless application. This is because an investigation would not lead to any different outcomes. In addition, it is reasonable to expect Mr X to use his right of review and appeal if he disagrees with the Council’s decision.

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s decision not to include certain disability related expenditure in its financial assessment, meaning she has to pay more for the cost of her care. We found the Council at fault for how it considered whether a private prescription for Ms X could be included as disability related expenditure. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X and re-consider whether her private prescription could be included as disability related expenditure.

Summary: Mrs X complains that the Council failed to comply with the agreed action in the Ombudsman’s final decision for her previous complaint to source a domestic support provider for her. The Council took sufficient action to source a domestic support provider for Mrs X. But the Council is at a fault as it failed to consider if it needed to make reasonable adjustments for Mrs X to complete the paperwork for direct payments. This fault did not cause significant injustice to Mrs X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s issuing and escalation of penalty charge notices (PCNs). The evidence suggests the Council reached its decision properly, so investigation would be unlikely to find fault.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council repeatedly missed his assisted bin collection. This has caused his bin to be overloaded and caused Mr X emotional distress. The Ombudsman has found the Council at fault for failing to collect Mr X’s rubbish.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about damage to his property caused by a Council owned tree. This is because it is reasonable for Mr X to submit a claim to the Council’s insurers, and ultimately take the matter to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s installation of a hand rail in Mr X’s home. The complaint is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to properly investigate and take appropriate action in relation to reports of disrepair and safety concerns at his privately rented property. We found there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council investigated or responded to reports of disrepair at Mr X’s home.

Summary: Mx Y complains the Council mishandled their homelessness application and placed them in unsuitable interim accommodation. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council’s handling of the homelessness application. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mx Y and pay a financial remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his wall has been damaged by Council refuse collectors. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to take the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council decision to extend the period the complainant is excluded from using its libraries. There is not enough fault in the way the Council made its decision.