LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council granting consent for the complainant’s neighbour to build a dropped kerb. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to lodge an appeal. It is not possible to establish the in injustice until a Tribunal’s outcome is known.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about a children social worker’s report to a child protection conference. It is unlikely our investigation could achieve more than has been offered or achieved.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint how the Council assessed a child’s needs and how it managed the child’s education while a tribunal considered an appeal. This is because the matter complained about is not separable from the appeal, and the courts have ruled we cannot say what education should be provided in such circumstances.

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about her children being removed from her care and contact stopped following court proceedings, because it lies outside our jurisdiction. The law prevents us from considering complaints about matters that have been considered and decided in court. We have no discretion to do so.

Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s introduction of speed limits and traffic regulations in 2019. The complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint, made on behalf of Mr Y, about the evidence the Council provided to the Court of Protection when the court decided where Mr Y should live. The law does not allow us to investigate what happened in court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about weeds on his road as the personal injustice caused to Mr X is not sufficient to warrant our involvement.

Summary: The Council was at fault for the quality of care provided to Mrs X meaning she did not receive the care in her care plan. The Council was also at fault for failing to provide Mr X with respite care. As a result, he did not get a break from caring for Mrs X. I have made recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about information the Council provided to the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service. This is because the matter is not separable from what happened in court.

Ms X complained the Council failed in the way it carried out her care needs assessment and re-assessment and failed to arrange support for her eligible care needs. Ms X also says the Council failed to properly carry out her financial assessment.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to initiate child protection enquiries and place children in his care on a child protection plan. He also complained about the conduct of social workers. There was no fault in the Council’s decision to place the children in his care on child protection plans. There was some fault in how the Council recorded discussions with partner agencies and a missed Child in Need visit, but these did not cause Mr X an injustice. The Council agreed to remind its officers to appropriately document discussions and to ensure Child in Need visits are complet

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage to the complainant’s house because of a defective highway repair. This is a matter that needs to be determined in court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to renew the complainant’s Blue Badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s failure to advise him to secure a charge on his late mother’s, Mrs C’s, property. This is because it is unlikely we would find enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council acted with bias in favour of his ex-wife during its involvement with his children. The Council followed the correct process and did not act with bias. It was not at fault.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s response to his requests for more support with his caring role and the way it dealt with his complaint about that. He says this caused him much stress. At this point, we find that the Council caused Mr X injustice in the way it dealt with him and his complaint. It has agreed to apologise, pay Mr X £150, and review its training for staff and information for people using Council services.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council invoicing him for his late father’s top up fees. This is because the Council has agreed to waive the charge and pay Mr B £200 for his time and trouble. We are satisfied the actions agreed by the Council remedy the injustice to Mr B.

Summary: Mrs Z complains about the way the Council conducted a financial assessment for her daughter, Miss X. We have not found fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: there is no evidence of fault that has caused Ms C injustice as a result of Leicestershire County Council’s consideration of the matters she raised in her complaint in 2021

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council managed the transfer process for Mr X’s child’s Education Health and Care Plan. How the Council arrived at its decision is not separable from the decision it reached, in respect of which Mr X has used his right of appeal to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal. The injustice caused by a delay of one week in issuing the final Plan is not enough to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged by a pothole which the Council had failed to repair. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his claim by taking the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to issue Mr X with a parking permit for a residents parking zone which he does not live in.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mrs B’s Care Provider giving notice to quit. This is because further investigation could not add to the Care Provider’s responses.

Summary: Mr M complains on behalf of his mother, Mrs F, about the Council’s decision that she deprived herself of assets to avoid paying towards her care costs. We have not found fault.