LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about problems the complainant has with his rubbish collections. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council refused his request for a personal transport budget. This request was to cover the mileage costs of driving his son, F, to and from school. We have decided to uphold Mr X’s complaint because there is evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making. This caused Mr X uncertainty and confusion. To remedy this, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X, make him a payment, retake its decision and make a service improvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing a housing benefit overpayment to Mrs X. It was reasonable for Mrs X to submit an appeal to the Council and the independent benefits tribunal if it was not withdrawn.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed dealing with his planning enforcement complaint, putting him to time and trouble and causing distress. We found the Council at fault for delay. We recommended it apologise to Mr X, pay him £100 for time and trouble, pay him £100 for distress and, investigate his complaint. Further, that it take action to prevent recurrence.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with reports of antisocial behaviour. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council wrongly bypassed her bids for a registered provider property. The Council is at fault as it did not properly record the medical advisor’s recommendations. The Council would have forwarded Mrs X’s nomination to the registered provider if it had properly recorded the medical advisor’s recommendations. However, we cannot know if the registered provider would have offered the property to Mrs X. The Council’s fault caused uncertainty to Mrs X which it has agreed to apologise for and make a payment of £300 to her. The Council will also review its housing allocati

Summary: Miss X complained the Council wrongly decided not to fund school transport for her son Y to the school named in his Education, Health and Care Plan, and blamed Miss X for not choosing a closer school. The Council was at fault for failing to provide Y travel assistance and not properly considering Y’s eligibility. The Council agreed to reimburse Miss X’s financial loss in driving Y to and from school between September 2019 and July 2022, and pay her £300 to recognise the distress and uncertainty caused to her. The Council agreed to arrange travel assistance for Y from September 2022.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to review a Special Guardianship Order for her grandchild, Y. This caused Mrs X distress as she considered a review may have led to Y having increased contact with her birth parents. The Council was at fault, but this did not lead to the injustice Mrs X has described. We have exercised discretion to investigate this complaint and it would have been reasonable to expect the Council to do the same. Mrs X has been caused frustration by the Council’s refusal to consider exercising discretion to investigate the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with roads and drains on the estate where Mrs X lives. This is because it was open to Mrs X to check what legal agreements were in place when she purchased her property and so she has not been caused an injustice as a result of the actions of the Council.

Summary: There was fault by the Council. The Council delayed assessing Mrs X’s care needs, did not ask the NHS to reinstate funding until the assessments were complete and did not tell Mr X of the exact financial contribution his wife would need to make towards care costs for over 6 months. This caused Mr X avoidable stress and worry, although Mrs X stayed in her care home throughout. A payment of £500, along with waiving the financial contribution for 3 months, remedies the injustice from the Council’s actions.

Ms X complains that the Council has charged council tax on a property she owns. We will not investigate this complaint because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his concerns about his neighbour’s building work. This is because it is unlikely we could achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her concerns about a local builder. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and the Council’s decision does not cause Ms X significant injustice.

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 him to lose out on a school place.

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 Q. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault which caused him to lose out on a school place.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about extra costs added to Ms X’s council tax account. This is because the complaint is made late and there are not good reasons to investigate now.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage caused to the complainant’s fence. This is because it is reasonable to expect the complainant to go to court to determine any liability owed by the Council.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his council tax account. We found fault by the Council, including avoidable delay and taking council tax recovery action after Mr X appealed to the Valuation Tribunal. Mr X experienced avoidable distress and unnecessary time and trouble before the Council adjusted his council tax bill to show a credit balance. To put matters right, the Council agreed to apologise to Mr X, pay £ 450 in recognition of his distress, time and trouble and refund his council tax credit.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about information provided to the complainant about their mother’s care. This is because

Summary: Mr X complains the Coroner’s office failed to tell him his sister’s brain had been removed at a post-mortem. This caused him and his family distress and financial loss. We find fault with the Council. We have made some recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to properly deal with her Council Tax Reduction claim and application for a Severe Mental Impairment discount. We found there was fault that warranted a remedy.

Summary: Mr B is unhappy with the outcome of the Council’s statutory children’s complaint investigation. He believes two of his complaints should have been upheld. Mr B said he has been left feeling uneasy about accessing support from the Council. Mr B says the Council did not address all his concerns. We did not find fault with the Council.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council was at fault in how it carried out a Right to Buy sale of a council property to her and conducted the separate sale of a garage. We will not investigate Ms X’s concerns the Council decided not to include the garage as part of her Right to Buy as she can go to the county court about the matter. We will not investigate Ms X’s concerns about the Council’s valuation of the property as the District Valuer deals with disputes about valuations. We found no evidence of fault by the Council in dealing with Ms X’s Right to Buy application so are completing our investi

Mrs X complains about the Council failure to act against a council officer subjecting her family to anti-social behaviour. She would like the officer sacked. We will not investigate because