LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: HOS found the Council has provided reasonable redress for Ms X’s complaint regarding works to her kitchen. LGSCO did not find fault in how the Council assessed whether Ms X’s property could be adapted to meet her needs. LGSCO found fault in how the Council decided Ms X’s priority for rehousing in 2022. Both Ombudsmen found fault with the Council’s complaint handling. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X, make payments, and act to improve its services.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council consulted residents about a proposed development scheme in the area where the complainant lives. This is because the complainant has not suffered significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application and the temporary accommodation it put her in. There are parts of the complaint we have not investigated because too much time has passed. We find the Council at fault for not completing repair work to Miss X’s property, which left her with water and sewage problems. The Council has agreed to follow up on the remedies it has offered as they are satisfactory to remedy any injustice caused.

Summary: the Council failed to check arrangements were in place at a mainstream nursery to deliver special educational provision for Mr F’s daughter G. G did not receive provision for the 15 hours a week she attended the nursery between June 2022 and December 2023. We find fault with the way the Council amended G’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan in anticipation of her transfer to school. Due to a lack of capacity, the Council then applied a blanket policy and failed to consider G’s individual circumstances which delayed her full-time attendance at a special nursery. We have recommended

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about home to school transport for the complainant’s son. This is because it is unlikely we could add anything to the Council’s response or achieve the outcome the complainant wants.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide Mr X’s child with home to school transport. This is because an investigation is unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: The Ombudsmen find fault with the Council’s handling of Ms X’s management transfer applications and homeless application after she experienced domestic abuse. The Council has agreed to apologise, award Ms X Band A priority, make payments to remedy injustice, and act to improve its services.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about her son’s care and support provision. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider her complaint whilst the matter is being considered in ongoing court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the education provided to the complainant’s daughter and the school admissions process. We have no powers to consider complaints about what happens in schools. Miss X can appeal the decision not to offer her daughter a place at her preferred schools. Both schools are academies, and we have no powers to consider complaints about admissions to this type of school.

Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to deliver Mr B’s son’s speech and language therapy for around two months. It was also at fault for being slow to investigate whether other aspects of his special educational needs support were being delivered. It has already offered Mr B suitable remedies for his – and his son’s – injustice. It will also take steps to improve its service.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of planning applications and an appeal for works to a property near the complainant’s home. The alleged faults do not cause the complainant a significant enough personal injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with a planning application for a property adjoining the complainant’s home. We consider she has not suffered sufficient personal injustice because of the Council’s actions to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with a planning application for a property in the road where the complainant lives. We consider he has not suffered sufficient personal injustice because of the Council’s actions to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s decisions regarding her housing application and how it considered her medical evidence. We found some fault with how the Council did not demonstrate its own decision making. However, we do not consider it caused Miss X a significant injustice. The Council delayed with a reassessment and has agreed to remedy the injustice this caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about housing allocations because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an event’s compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty. The matter complained about is not an administrative function of the Council and is therefore not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an organisation’s compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Miss X’s housing application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly issued him with a Fixed Penalty Notice for littering when he left domestic refuse out too early. We found the Council at fault because it was not clear how it considered the full range of powers available before deciding to issue the notice but consider the agreed action of a refund of the amount paid by Mr X and a reminder to relevant staff provides a suitable remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the decision to detain him under Section 2 of the Mental Health Act 1983. This is because Mr X appealed this decision to the First Tier Tribunal (Mental Health). This means we are prevented from investigating this complaint.

Summary: Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of her concerns about a leaking roof causing damp and mould in her temporary accommodation. The Council has already acknowledged some fault, apologised to Miss X, made service improvements and offered a symbolic payment. We have found additional fault with the Council’s record keeping. This has caused Miss X an injustice in the form of distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to pay Miss X £400 for the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the priority the Council awarded on its housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence to fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint as it is outside our jurisdiction. We cannot look at complaints about what happens in schools. The rest of Miss X’s concerns need to be put to the Council before we will consider them.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s assessment of her housing register priority. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.