LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to close a planning enforcement investigation. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a delay in providing information about the cost of his mother’s care. We asked the Council to take action to resolve the complaint early and it has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mr X and make service improvements.

Summary: There was fault in the way the Council considered an application and appeal for home to school transport on special educational needs/disability/mobility grounds. This casts doubt on the decision reached. The Council will apologise, hold a fresh appeal, make a time and trouble payment, and carry out service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a council tax liability dispute as this is a matter for the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about being issued a Fixed Penalty Notice for flytipping. This is because Mrs X can raise a defence against the issuing of the notice in court.

Summary: Mr C complained about the Council’s refusal to fund his wife’s direct payment for the full week when she died. As a result, he said he had costs to pay her self-employed carer. We found no fault by the Council. This is because Mr C was not required to pay the self-employed carer under the arrangement when the care support ceased. The Council would therefore not be expected to have a contingency for this in place, and it was entitled to reach its view.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr A’s application on behalf of his mother, a blue badge holder, for a free residents parking permit. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation and Mr A has been advised what is required to complete the application.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to provide a refund of a particular amount for care costs. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault that a refund of this amount was actually owed.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms X’s complaint about receiving liability orders for council tax arrears dating back to 2022. We have no jurisdiction to investigate matters which have been subject to court proceedings.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council should have awarded his household higher housing priority. He said the Council did not have regard for the available evidence, or the impact of the accommodation, when it made its decision. We have found the Council at fault for a delay in completing its review of Mr X’s housing priority. We have made recommendations to remedy the injustice we believe this caused. We have not found the Council at fault for how it made its decision about Mr X’s housing priority. We cannot therefore question the merits of that decision.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her aunt’s Council arranged care. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is late and there are no good grounds to exercise discretion to consider it now.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a bulky waste collection. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council sending council tax recovery documents to the complainant’s previous address. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms Y’s complaint that her child’s school failed to increase her child’s timetable from part-time to full-time by the end of July 2024. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.

Summary: Miss X complained about the way the Council dealt with her housing application. We found no fault in the way the Council made its decision. However, we found fault with the Council’s delay in completing a review. This caused frustration to Miss X and the Council will apologise for this and make service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the safeguarding enquiries completed by the Council. He says the investigations were completed internally and was not independent. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a homelessness application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with the complainants housing application because there is insufficient evidence of fault. It would be reasonable for the complainant to ask the Council to carry out a review of the suitability of their temporary accommodation.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to secure J’s special educational provision and delayed issuing a final Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. Ms X also said the Council failed to discharge its education duties when J stopped attending school. We have found the Council at fault for the delay in issuing J’s EHC Plan and for parts of its complaint handling. We have made recommendations to remedy the injustice we believe this caused. We have found the Council at fault for not properly recording its decisions about alternative education provision. However, this did not cause an injusti

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s escalation of a penalty charge notice. This is because it would be reasonable for Mrs X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to reinstate her right of appeal.

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

Summary: X complained about how the Council dealt with an extension on their neighbour’s land. X is concerned a flat roof could now be used as a roof terrace, which would reduce privacy in X’s garden. We found fault in the way the Council made its decision. This is because it did not use a condition controlling roof terraces on flat roofs it had imposed on an earlier approval for this site, and there was nothing written in the case officer report to explain why. However, we did not consider that the fault caused an injustice. This is because the roof is not used as a terrace and further permis

Miss X complained about how the Council dealt with her housing application when she was pregnant and homeless having fled domestic abuse.

Summary: Mrs Y complained the Council failed to arrange suitable care for her mother, Mrs X, when she was discharged from hospital. Mrs Y said this meant she and her sister, Ms W, had to provide the care instead. The Council was at fault for delay in arranging a new care provider to help Mrs X, when the original provider did not work out. This caused Mrs Y and her sister Ms W avoidable frustration and upset, for which the Council will apologise. The Council will also identify why the delay happened and what steps it needs to take to prevent similar fault in future.

Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint, about the Council’s involvement with a child who was not attending school full-time. This is because we could not add to the Council’s response or provide anything meaningful through further investigation.