LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s delay in moving him and his child to alternative temporary accommodation after it agreed to put him on the transfer list. This service failure caused injustice to Mr X. I have completed the investigation because the Council has agreed to provide a suitable remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s priority on the housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled a penalty charge notice issued in October 2020. We cannot lawfully investigate because Mr X has used his legal remedies to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and London Tribunals adjudicator.

Summary: The Ombudsman found fault on Ms D’s complaint against the Council. It failed to bring her case back to the adoption panel promptly and did not pursue one of its recommendations. It failed to provide her with a copy of her file as it said it would. She was given incorrect information about missing documents. It communicated poorly with her, failed to give her clear information about its role with the new regional adoption agency, failed to give her support, and delayed dealing with her complaint and case. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to compensate Mr X for applying an incorrect date to his housing application. Any investigation would not lead to a different outcome because the Council did not cause Mr X significant injustice. We would also not be able to achieve the outcome he would like.

Summary: We found fault with the record keeping by the district nurses and the way they ordered dressings. We also found there was a lack of a multidisciplinary team approach to Mr B’s care. We found the Council did not action its safeguarding enquiry immediately and it was not open and honest with Miss A during the complaints process. These faults caused avoidable distress and frustration to Miss A. We recommended an apology, service improvements and financial recompense to address this injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions in connection with a visit to the complainant’s home. This is because the complaint is late and there are no grounds to consider it now.

Summary: Mrs Y complains about the length of time she has been in Band A under the Council’s housing allocations scheme. We do not find the Council at fault for not making an offer of housing. It has followed its housing allocations scheme and given the application a high priority. It has not made an offer due to the shortage of accommodation.

Summary: the Council planned practical support to build G’s confidence and ensure her journey to a new school was safe and manageable for her. However, G went to a different school and the Council paid for taxis instead. The Council appears to have stopped paying for taxis without carrying out a review. Ms M wants the Council to provide long-term school transport, but the Council has not considered her request. The Council has agreed to carry out the review and consider Ms M’s request.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to recover housing benefit it had overpaid. This is because it is not unreasonable to expect the complainant to have used his right of appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council responded to safeguarding concerns about him. That is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complainant has already appealed to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of Mrs Y that the Council failed to pay for her residential care during renovation work on her home. He said this has caused him a financial impact and Mrs Y would have been at risk if she had stayed at home. He would like the Council to pay for the residential care placement. We found some fault in the way the Council dealt with this and the Council has agreed to apologise for this.

Summary: The complaint about the Council’s failure to properly safeguard the complainant’s mother, Mrs D will not be investigated. This is because Mrs D has now died, and we would be unable to remedy any personal injustice that she may have suffered. It is also unlikely investigation of the complaint would result in finding the Council at fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about what happened when the complainant hit an unsecured traffic monitoring cable on the public highway. This is because it is reasonable for the complainant to take his claim for financial loss and personal injury to the courts.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s consideration of his child’s safety and its assessment of with whom she should have lived. This is not a separable matter from those that were or could have been considered in court and investigation would not lead to a worthwhile outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment created in 2016. This is because part of the complaint is late and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. In addition, the complainant could have used her appeal rights.

Summary: The Council acted with fault when it sent correspondence about Mr Y’s care and support in a format which was not suitable for his needs as a blind person. This caused Mr Y some time and trouble which the Council should apologise and pay £150 for. However, the fault did not mean that Mr Y was unaware of the requirement to pay towards his support because the records show he was informed about his responsibility to financially contribute to the cost of his care.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complaints procedure the Council is using as investigation is unlikely to lead to any worthwhile outcome.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment because the matter has been heard by the tribunal. We will not investigate the complaint about the complainant’s council tax account being closed in error because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

Summary: The Council was not at fault for the way it re-approved Ms X back onto the fostering register. The Council was at fault for the support provided to Ms X during a fostering placement. This caused injustice to Ms X and the placement ended. The Council agreed to carry out the actions at the end of this statement to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Fixed Penalty Notice for alleged fly-tipping. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the complainant could raise a defence in court.

Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of her requests for more support for her child since 2018 and her complaints about this. The Council has already addressed and remedied faults identified by considering Mrs X’s complaints through all three stages of the statutory complaint process twice. The Council was at fault for not considering the injustice caused by delay in it progressing both complaints in line with the statutory timescales. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X and her child for the impact of the delays. The Council will also remind all re