LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s green waste subscription service. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Ms P complained the Council unfairly made changes to a short breaks plan which had been working well for her son. We found the Council at fault for a delay in carrying out its short breaks plan review, and in failing to follow the statutory complaints process. The Council has agreed to make a symbolic payment to Ms P in acknowledgement of the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council delaying its decision on his planning application. Mr X and his agent had appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate against the Council’s non-determination of his application, which it was not unreasonable for them to have used.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the way in which the Council completed the children’s statutory complaints procedure in response to her complaint it failed to provide her family with appropriate support. We have found fault with the way in which some parts of the procedure were completed, causing injustice. The faults are: the recommended payment to recognise the impact of the Council’s failings on the family did not properly reflect the extent of this injustice in line with our published remedies guidance; and the Council did not properly implement some of the other recommendations. To remedy

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about highway repair. It is reasonable for Mr X to pursue the matter through the courts.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not review her child’s education, health and care plan within the statutory timescales, failed to provide the provision in the plan and failed to provide alternative education when her child was out of school. We found fault by the Council causing Mrs X and her child an injustice. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment in recognition of the injustice caused. We could not investigate all parts of Mrs X’s complaint. This is because they are outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with matters relating to a child in foster care. This is because doing so would not lead to a different outcome and because we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant seeks.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s maintenance of a road near where she lives. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigation. Even if there was fault, the matters complained of do not cause Ms X such significant personal injustice to warrant investigation. It would be reasonable for her to pursue any finding on whether the road meets legally acceptable standards through the court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to provide free school meals for her child, Y, between 2018 and 2020 when they were too unwell to attend school. This is because the complaint is late and there is no good reason to investigate now.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to charge him for a replacement refuse bin. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of a social worker in relation to Miss X. There has been recent court action in respect of one of Miss X’s children, and we are legally prevented from investigating matters that have been or could reasonably have been raised in court. Investigating the content of a phone call where there were no independent witnesses would be unlikely to lead to a finding of fault or to the outcome Miss X is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council refusing to replace her broken bin free of charge. There is not enough significant personal injustice caused the matter complained about to warrant an investigation.

Summary: The Council delayed finalising Ms X’s child, Z’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan in 2023, failed to make sufficient efforts to find Z a placement in a specialist school and relied on a mainstream school which said it could not meet Z’s needs to provide their education. As a result, Z has not received all the education in their EHC Plan for four terms and this continues to date. To recognise the period of missed education and the uncertainty caused, the Council has agreed to apologise, pay Ms X £7,200, and pay her £2,000 for each additional term this academic year that Z continu

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s children’s services involvement with the complainant family. This is because the complaint concerns the commencement of court proceedings or matters that have been raised, or could reasonably have been raised, in court.

Summary: We upheld this complaint, and the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by taking the complaint through the children’s statutory complaints procedure and by apologising to Mr X. We did not investigate Mr X’s substantive complaints about support he received as a looked after child or as a care leaver because the Council agreed to progress the complaint through the statutory children’s complaints procedure.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide a free replacement recycling bin after hers was damaged. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

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 take the Council to court.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council’s Education, Health and Care needs assessment of her child, Y, was inadequate. This is because Mrs X used her right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal and the law says we cannot investigate.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to close two household waste recycling centres. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, and we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant would like.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the education placement named within Miss X’s child’s Education, Health, and Care (EHC) Plan. This is because Miss X has a right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal it would be reasonable to use. We will not investigate the process undertaken by the Council to amend the EHC Plan as there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a charge for a replacement bin. This is because the Council will reconsider the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a right of way because it is late without good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council in relation to the care of the complainant’s child. This is because the complaint is not separable from matters which have been considered and decided in court.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained the Council signed off installation works of a specialist electrical bath for their child without getting an electrical safety certificate from the contractors. Mr and Mrs X also complained the Council installed the incorrect bath. We found fault with the Council failing to get the correct electrical safety certificate and for delays in making this safe. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr and Mrs X and pay them £500 for the avoidable distress and inconvenience caused. We did not find fault with the Council’s installation of the bath or later changing this to

Summary: Ms C complained the Council wrongly granted her neighbour prior approval to add an additional storey to the property. She also said it was biased and intentionally caused delay in its complaints handling. We have not found enough fault in the process the Council followed to reach its view, it therefore reached a decision it was entitled to make. Nor did we find any evidence of bias and it responded to her complaint in line with its policy.