LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate a complaint about a how a Council made a Best Interest decision because there is not enough evidence of fault in the process if followed.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint the Council completed an inadequate care assessment and decision to reduce her mother’s direct payments. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We cannot by law investigate this complaint about the Council’s alledged failure to properly handle a dispute about the complainant’s neighbour’s hedge. The issues raised have been considered by the Planning Inspectorate and we therefore have no jurisdiction to investigate.

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s actions relating to the care of a late family member, Mr Y. We found fault because of poor communication from the Council and inadequate record keeping by a provider working on its behalf. We also found fault because the Council took too long to complete assessments for both Mr Y and Miss X, which led to linked delays in organising direct payments for Mr Y’s care. This caused Miss X avoidable frustration and distress. To remedy the injustice caused by this fault, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X and provide reminders t

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s response to his reports of breaches of planning control at a neighbouring property which he says has resulted in a loss of light, privacy and amenity. We find the Council at fault for delays in its investigation and for not keeping Mr X updated. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to reflect the injustice to Mr X, finalise its investigation and act to prevent recurrence.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to issue a Blue Badge for the complainant’s son. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of his housing register application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mrs X’s council tax. The law prevents us investigating court action the Council took. Some points of complaint are late without good enough reason to accept them now. The Council has not had a reasonable opportunity to deal with a complaint about other matters.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council did not properly review the suitability of temporary accommodation it provided her when she was homeless, when she asked it to. It also did not properly consider her priority on its housing register. There was fault by the Council which caused Miss X to remain in bed and breakfast accommodation that was unsuitable for her, which caused her distress. The Council agreed to apologise, pay a financial remedy, reconsider Miss X’s housing priority, and produce an action plan to address faults identified in this case.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax liability as there is a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: The Council has already accepted fault for delay investigating Mr X’s reports of anti-social behaviour and delay dealing with his complaint. The remedy it offered in response to the complaint, an apology and symbolic payment, is suitable to remedy the injustice caused. There was no fault in the Council’s investigation of the ASB or its decision not to take action against the alleged perpetrators.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about his failed payment for a penalty charge notice. This is because the injustice he claims is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her child, Y’s, Education, Health, and Care plan. The Council was at fault for delays consulting schools and putting tuition in place for Y, and for its poor communication early on. It agreed to provide a remedy for the term of education Y missed. It also agreed to carry out a review of Y’s plan.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions while Mrs X was homeless. The complaint is late without good enough reason to pursue it now. Any review is unlikely to have changed the housing register priority. Mrs X could reasonably have used her right to go to court about the delay completing the suitability review and the result of that review. Compensation is properly a matter for the courts, not for us.

Summary: Ms M complains about the way her son’s care was managed by the Trust after he left hospital in June 2021. We will not investigate this complaint because the organisation has already admitted fault in several areas of Mr N’s care. It has investigated several times, provided five written responses, improved its service and trained its staff to ensure the faults do not happen again. Further investigation by the Ombudsmen would not achieve anything more.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by the Council. This is because it would be reasonable for him to apply to the court to challenge the Council’s escalation of the case.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for new houses near the complainant’s home. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision. And we cannot require the Council to withdraw the planning permission.

Summary: Mr B complained that the Council had failed to take effective action to stop a resident blocking access to his garage. It had also failed to respond to his communications about the problems or refund the garage rent despite promising to do so. We have found fault in the Council’s actions causing Mr B an injustice. The Council has taken action to stop the anti-social behaviour, to refund the past rent to Mr B and freeze ongoing payments. It has also agreed to apologise to him, make a symbolic payment of £300 and improve its record-keeping for the future

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about homelessness temporary accommodation because Ms X took court action.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s actions in relation to alleged planning control breaches at a development near to his home and about poor communication. We found fault because the Council did not act in a timely manner when beginning its investigation into the breaches and its communication was poor overall. To remedy the injustice caused by this fault, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mr X and issue reminders to relevant officers.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. There is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions after the death of Miss X’s parent. The complaint is late and there is no good reason for us to exercise discretion to investigate these matters now.

Summary: Ms X complained about the way the Council dealt with two Penalty Charge Notices it issued against her and the way the Council sought to recover the debt. We have not found the Council at fault for how it dealt with the Penalty Charge Notices and its decision to take enforcement action, however there was some fault with how the Council communicated with Ms X. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the way the Council responded to the complainant’s reports of nuisance from a neighbour. This is because we have no power to investigate a council when it is acting as a landlord.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint against the Council about the conduct of coroners involved in investigating the death of the complainant’s husband. We have no jurisdiction to investigate this complaint because the Council is not responsible for the issues.