LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her mother’s request for a level access shower. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: Miss Y complains about the process followed by the Council when considering her application for a Blue Badge. We find there is procedural fault because the Council’s assessment did not consider all the evidence about the physical effects of Miss Y’s medical conditions and any impact on her ability to walk. The Council will apologise and refer Miss Y’s application for a fresh assessment.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to remove offensive graffiti from a council owned building within a timely manner. This is because the Council has conceded fault and an investigation would be unlikely to lead to a worthwhile outcome.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council issuing the complainant with a penalty charge notice for an alleged parking contravention.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the outcome of his occupational therapy assessment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay completing Mr X’s ‘right to buy’ application. This is mainly because the complaint is late without good reason to investigate it now.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. Mr X has used his right of appeal and we have no power to change the decision made by London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about parking permits because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s child case. The law prevents us from considering matters that have been considered in court, and it would be reasonable for Ms X to raise her concerns as part of that process.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in determining Ms X’s Code of Conduct complaint made against a local councillor. This is because the Council has now issued its final report on the matter and there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Ms B complained about delay by the Council in awarding her keyworker priority status on the housing register. We found fault with the Council’s actions which meant Ms B missed out on bidding for more suitable properties. The Council offered to pay Ms B £500 for the uncertainty. It also agreed to find Ms B alternative permanent accommodation within the next three months (on condition she starts bidding for suitable properties) or pay her a further £500 and improve its procedures for the future.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a fixed penalty notice for fly tipping as the complainant can ultimately challenge the matter in court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about housing-related matters. The law prevents us investigating the Council’s management of social housing. The Information Commissioner can better consider the point about access to information. Other points have not completed the Council’s complaint procedure.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s treatment of Mr X when he attended the Town Hall asking to speak to the Chief Executive. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to respond to Ms Y’s requests for reviews of the suitability of her temporary accommodation in 2019, 2020, and 2021. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Ms Y to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to remove flags placed without planning permission. This is because the Council have since removed the flags. Further investigation is unlikely to achieve anything more.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Miss X’s housing register application. This is because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Summary: Mrs X’s representative complained about the cancellation of a cleaner; failure to find a new personal assistant; failure to consider a requested reasonable adjustment and failure to refund her client contribution. She says this has caused stress, anxiety and worsened her health conditions. There is no evidence of fault causing a significant enough injustice to warrant further investigation.

Summary: The Council’s delay progressing a statutory homelessness review it agreed to complete as a remedy to a previous complaint to us was fault. The review found that Ms X’s accommodation was unsuitable. The Council has already identified a suitable remedy for the injustice this caused Ms X. The Council has also agreed to apologise, make payments to Ms X and Mr Y and act to improve its services.

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council did not properly deal with a Blue Badge or taxi-card application properly. The Council is at fault because it delayed dealing with Mr X’s Blue Badge and taxi-card applications and did not make consistent reasonable adjustments. Mr X suffered avoidable distress and incurred time and trouble. The Council should apologise to Mr X, pay Mr X £200 for distress and £100 for time and trouble, provide guidance to staff, provide an action plan and refer to the Cabinet Member responsible.

Summary: Mr C complained the Council delayed providing him with a new recycling bin after his was stolen and he had to repeatedly chase it for responses about the matter. We find the Council was at fault as it delayed providing Mr C with a replacement recycling bin and it delayed responding to his communication about the matter. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a Freedom Pass (disability based). This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to replace a bin at Mr X’s request. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to result in a different outcome.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the poor environmental state of the Council’s area. This is because the issues raised by Mr X affect all the residents of the Council’s area and so the complaint falls outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that he is not eligible for its housing register because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the decision was made to justify our involvement.