LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider his complaint whilst the case is subject to ongoing court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council withheld information from him about his mother’s, Mrs Q’s care. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s provision of information about care charges. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about the quality of Mr Y’s domiciliary care. There is not a good reason for the delay in Ms X bringing the matter to the Ombudsman.

Summary: Mrs B says the Council gave her wrong advice about whether she could use her blue badge to park in a business parking bay, wrongly told her it would cancel any penalty charge notices issued and delayed responding to her complaint. It is likely the Council gave Mrs B wrong information about where she could park with her blue badge, the Council delayed responding to her complaint and failed to consider the complaint properly. An apology and payment to Mrs B is satisfactory remedy.

Summary: Mr & Mrs F complained that an enforcement agent visited their property in relation to a parking charge without notice and threatened Mr F. We have ended our investigation. This is because Mr F has taken court action and the law says we cannot investigate a complaint if someone has started court action about the same matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a statement the Council included in a report it produced as part of court proceedings. The law prevents us doing so.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refer Mr X under its Managed Contact Policy. This is because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council was at fault in the way a care home it commissioned cared for her mother Mrs Y causing distress. We have found no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it has charged Mrs Y for her stay at the care home. We found no evidence of fault in the standard of care provided to Mrs Y over her weight and nutritional needs. The Council has accepted there was fault in the way the care provider responded to Mrs X’s complaints about the matter, apologised and offered a suitable remedy in recognition of the distress caused. We found fault in the way the care home de

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s claim for damages to his car. This is because it does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to go to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of adoption records. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaints about her child, Y’s, Education, Health and Care Plan or about delays in the Council’s complaint responses. This is because the complaint is late. In addition, the Council has already offered a suitable remedy for part of the complaint, and an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to achieve anything further.

Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to provide Ms X with interim accommodation when it had reason to believe she might be homeless and in priority need. As a result, Ms X spent four weeks sleeping rough. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Ms X for the injustice this caused. Ms X had a right to review and then appeal the Council’s decision that she was not homeless. Therefore, we did not investigate Ms X’s complaint that this decision was wrong.

Summary: We find the Council at fault for failing to complete the statutory children’s complaints procedure and closing Miss X’s complaint. The Council has re-started the statutory children’s complaints procedure. It will also make a symbolic payment to Miss X and apologise to her.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the automated parking system is faulty. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is a legal right to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and it is reasonable to expect Mr X to use it.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with safeguarding concerns about a child. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing a summons for council tax to an incorrect address. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: Ms T complained the Council had not taken appropriate action following her complaints that there are rats in her street. We found the Council at fault. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms T, make a payment in acknowledgement of the injustice caused to her and to implement service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to a report of noise nuisance. The Council responded, investigated, and decided to take no action. It also investigated Ms X’s complaint about this matter and further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s Schools Admissions Appeal Panel’s failure to provide his child with a place at School Y. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault which caused them to lose out on a school place.

Summary: There was a delay issuing Y’s final Education, Health and Care Plan naming his post 16 college placement. This caused avoidable distress, inconvenience and a delay in appeal rights. The Council will apologise, make symbolic payments and review its procedures to minimise the chance of recurrence.

Summary: There was delay by the Council in agreeing and putting in place transport for Y’s college placement and lateness by the taxi the Council commissioned. This caused avoidable distress, inconvenience and missed education. The Council will apologise and make payments.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider her complaint because she does not have parental responsibility for the children involved.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that a social worker was at fault in completing a risk assessment regarding the complainant’s children. This is because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council failing to complete a homeless assessment for him and failing to act on serious disrepair in his accommodation. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.