LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about missed bin collections before and during industrial strike action. We have no jurisdiction to investigate matters which affect all or most people in the Council’s area, and the missed collection before the strike action does not cause a significant enough injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about charges for post-16 school transport. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr B complained about the Council closing his housing applications. We find that the Council delayed assessing Mr B’s first application, closed his application as incomplete without specifying which documents he had not provided, and wrongly closed his second application as incomplete when he had provided all the necessary documents. This caused

Summary: Ms B complained that the Council failed to consider evidence she provided to support her request for additional priority on the Council’s housing register. We find the Council failed to properly assess her housing needs. This caused Ms B frustration and inconvenience, as well as uncertainty about whether she could have moved to suitable accommodation by now if there had been no fault. The Council has agreed to carry out a proper assessment, apologise and make a payment to Ms B. It has also agreed to make service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse her request for a personal budget because there is no evidence of fault in the Council’s decision.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to change the Special Educational Needs and Disability tribunal lead for her case. This is because the issue concerns the Council’s handling of Mrs X’s appeal and if she has concerns about any information provided by the council officer it would be reasonable to expect her to raise her concerns with the Tribunal

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has repeatedly failed to collect the communal waste containers which service her block of flats. This has led to an accumulation of waste which Mrs X has had to hire skips to dispose of at her own expense. We found the Council’s repeated failure to collect the communal waste over a sustained period is fault. This fault has caused Mrs X frustration, difficulties, and financial expense. The Council will apologise and make payments to Mrs X.

Summary: Mr B complained about the accommodation the Council has provided since he and his family became homeless. We find that the Council failed to provide suitable accommodation. It placed the family in bed and breakfast accommodation for around 16 weeks, 10 weeks over the maximum time such accommodation can be used for homeless applicants with dependent children. The Council then placed the family in unsuitable accommodation, which is statutorily overcrowded and where they have to share facilities with other families. They have been living there for around 21 months. The Council has agreed

Summary: Ms X complained, on behalf of Mr Y, that the Council delayed completing the annual review of Mr Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan and delayed providing the provision in his post Tribunal Education, Health and Care Plan. This meant Mr Y missed out on getting provision he should have received. Ms X also complained about the Council’s complaint handling. We found the Council at fault for the time it took to issue a final Education, Health and Care Plan for Mr Y after the Tribunal and for its complaint handling. To remedy the injustice caused the Council agreed to apologise, make a paym

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’ss complaint about the Council’s officers using derogatory language. This is because there is not enough evidence of the Council causing personal injustice, it would be reasonable for Mr X to pursue a damages claim in court, and we cannot achieve the outcomes he seeks in relation to the Council’s staff. This means the matter does not warrant us investigating.

Summary: Mr B complained that the Council wrongly removed him from the housing register and failed to backdate his registration date when he rejoined. We find that the Council should not have removed Mr B from the housing register, delayed reviewing its decision and failed to properly consider information he provided about his homelessness. The Council’s actions caused Mr B significant distress and inconvenience and have left him with uncertainty about whether he would have successfully bid on housing if there had been no fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a paymen

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s safeguarding investigation and the actions of a day centre. There is insufficient evidence of fault that would justify us investigating the complaint further.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council placed her in unsuitable housing. The Council placed Miss X in unsuitable housing. Miss X and her family had to live in unsuitable housing for 5 months. The Council should apologise and pay Miss X £1,250.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about concerns he has about a discussion session held at a youth club. There is either no evidence of fault or we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council or achieve a different outcome. The Information Commissioner is better placed to consider Mr X’s complaint that the Council is withholding information.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the suitability of temporary accommodation. It was reasonable for Miss X to request a review of the Council’s decision, then to use her statutory right of appeal to county court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council was at fault in refusing the complainant’s application and appeals for education transport for her son. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed in reaching its decision to refuse her dropped kerb application and that its communication with her was poor. We have not found fault with the way the Council reached the decision but we found its communication with her was poor, causing confusion and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Mrs X.

Summary: Mr B complained about the Council closing his housing applications. We find that the Council’s communications were unclear and its decision that Mr B had not provided all the required documents with his application was wrong. This caused Mr B avoidable frustration and inconvenience. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Mr B.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a home to school transport application. There is no significant injustice from any fault by the Council, and it is unlikely that further investigation would lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about missed refuse collections between September and December 2024, and since January 2025. The alleged fault has not caused a significant enough injustice, we cannot investigate matters which affect all or most people in the Council’s area, and it is not a good use of our resources to look at the complaints process in isolation.

complains his son was not awarded dedicated home to school transport when the family moved. We find fault with the Council for failing to consider the information Mr P provided, causing him frustration and uncertainty. We have agreed the Council do the appeal again.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide Ms X’s child with free transport to school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr B complained the Council failed to remedy damp and mould disrepair issues with his temporary accommodation, despite him regularly reporting his concerns to it for over a year. The Council was at fault for its delays in carrying out the repairs, carrying out an inspection, and making a new suitability decision; not treating Mr B’s repeated contacts as a trigger for a review of suitability; and not moving Mr B to a different property when the service co-ordinator decided he needed to be urgently rehoused. Because of the fault, Mr B suffered distress and frustration, and he remained l

Summary: Mrs X complained about a failure to inform her and her family about care contributions and about short calls. We upheld the complaint because Mr Y’s care and support plan did not include his care contribution within his personal budget. The information the Council provided about charging before care started was too general. This caused avoidable distress. The Council accepted care calls were short which was fault causing Mr Y avoidable distress which cannot be remedied as he has died. Mrs Y also likely had to step in and provide some care. The Council will apologise, make symbolic pay

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with reports of anti-social behaviour. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.