LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s removal of the complainant’s family member from their care. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making, so we cannot question its decisions. Only the courts can make a decision in the circumstances.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council’s officers dealt with a planning application for a development in his area.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about care charges. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council was biased in its recommendation to approve a planning application. The Council’s Planning Committee rejected the application. Therefore, the complainant has not been caused a significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a delay by the Council in paying an incentive payment. This is because the Council has provided a satisfactory response and there is not enough remaining injustice to warrant an investigation. In addition, an allegation of breach of contract needs to be determined in court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to issue the complainant with a Community Protection Warning. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a data breach by the Council. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. This complaint is best considered by the Information Commissioner’s Office which is the body set up to consider complaints about data matters such as this.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council failed to enable his business to get suitable traffic access, and the Commission for New Towns allowed land to be developed which caused flooding on his land in the 1980s and 1990s. The complaint about the Council is late and there are no good reasons to investigate it now. We did not have jurisdiction to investigate complaints about the defunct Commission for New Towns.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council did not properly consider his application for free school transport. We find no fault with the Council for refusing his application.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with a complaint about the conduct of two town councillors. This is because we are unlikely to find fault. Nor can we achieve the outcome the complainant it is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council made contractual payments to a company. That is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: Mrs X complained about how the appeal panel considered her appeal for her child at a preferred school. There were some faults in how the panel considered Mrs X’s appeal. As a result, Mrs X cannot be satisfied the appeal process was carried out fairly. To remedy the injustice caused, the Council will

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage caused to Mr X’s driveway allegedly arising from the Council’s failure to maintain road drains. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to go to court to determine any liability owed by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with planning applications for a development near the complainant’s home. This is because parts of the complaint are late. The complainant has not suffered significant injustice as a result of the remaining issues complained about.

Summary: Mrs X complained on behalf of Mr Y about how the Council handled Mr Y’s care charges. There was fault by the Council in how it delayed changing and informing Mrs X about Mr Y’s increased contributions. The Council also failed to explain Mr Y’s revised charges to Mrs X in a timely manner. This caused Mrs X uncertainty, confusion and the time and trouble chasing and complaining to the Council. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s liability for damage caused by flooding following heating installation improvement work. It is reasonable for Mr X to seek a remedy from insurers or the courts if no liability is accepted.

Summary: There was no fault with the Council for refusing to backdate Miss X’s Discretionary Housing Payment. It based its decision on the information available at the time. We have completed our investigation.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about what the Council wrote in an assessment. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The content of the assessment is not separable from matters that formed part of court proceedings.

Summary: Mr B says the Council wrongly removed and destroyed his wife’s vehicle when it was not abandoned. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to remove and then dispose of the vehicle.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for the complainant’s neighbour to extend their home in 2020. This is a late complaint and we have seen no good reason to investigate now.

Summary: Ms X complains that the Council failed to make the provision set out in her son’s education, health and care plan. We found find no fault on the Council’s part. Ms X also complains about other matters which we have not investigated as they are inextricably linked with matters considered by the Tribunal so are outside our jurisdiction. Ms X also complained about discrimination by her son’s school. We have not investigated this complaint because the law says we cannot investigate a school’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s claim for compensation from the Council for damage caused to his property by tenants. This is because the complaint is a late complaint and because Mr X can take his claim against the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council responded after the complainant tried to use the recycling centre. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the Council has provided a proportionate response to some errors that did occur.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a possible breach of planning control. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.