LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Miss X complains the Council did not carry out the agreed actions from its stage three review of her complaint and did not provide a remedy for the injustice caused. Miss X says this has caused further distress. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for failing to consider and provide a suitable remedy for the fault found during the statutory complaints process. The Council has agreed to pay Miss X a financial remedy and carry out service improvements.

Summary: The Council asked Ms X to pay back several hundred pounds from her daughter’s person budget, as it says Ms X could not evidence how all the money was used. Ms X repaid this money to the Council but complained to the Ombudsman. The Council’s communication with Ms X regarding her daughter’s personal budget and her complaint was poor. In recognition of the frustration caused to Ms X by the Council’s faults, the Council has agreed to apologise, pay Ms X £150 and carry out service improvements.

Summary: Miss X said the Council carried out a flawed child and family assessment which caused distress and worry. We found fault in how the Council carried out the assessment which caused Miss X injustice. To put matters right, the Council agreed to apologise to Miss X and add her views to the assessment report.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Councils actions relating to Mr X’s concerns about a footpath diversion. This is because we have previously considered the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a refund of fees paid by taxi drivers as there is insufficient personal injustice caused to the complainant to warrant our further involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint the Council failed to provide a copy of the care assessments it completed for her mother. This is because the Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: Mr A complains about the time taken by the Council to make a decision about his Education, Health, and Care plan request for his daughter. He also complains about the Council’s delay in responding to his complaint. We find the Council at fault for both delays. The Council will make a payment to Mr A in recognition of the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council managed the annual review of a child’s Education Health and Care plan. This is because the decision to name a school has been appealed to the SEND Tribunal and other matters either have not caused a significant enough injustice or we could not add to the Council’s investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about planning permission issues. It is reasonable to expect him to have appealed about delays in deciding the application. It is unlikely we would find fault or that he has been caused any significant injustice by the other matters he complains of.

Summary: Mrs Y complained about the way the Council dealt with her child’s education and special educational needs provision. We have found fault with the Council’s delay in completing the Education Health and Care needs assessment process and its communication failures, causing injustice. The Council had already accepted fault and offered a remedy for the injustice. We have found the payments it offered for the impact of the missed special educational needs provision and distress and time and trouble are in line with the expectations in our guidance on remedies. It has agreed to make these pa

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about planning delays. We are unlikely to find significant fault or that she has been caused significant injustice which needs a remedy.

Summary: We upheld Miss X’s complaint about delays in the Education, Health and Care Plan process regarding her children, Y and Z. The Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: We upheld Ms X’s complaint about delays in the Education, Health and Care process regarding her child, Y. The Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused. We did not investigate some of Ms X’s complaint because Ms X already appealed the matter to the SEND Tribunal and the law says we cannot investigate.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to reimburse costs the complainant incurred due to its failure to attend a mediation meeting because there is no evidence of fault in the way it made this decision.

Summary: The Council accepted fault in that it failed to provide alternative education for the complainant’s child when the College ended the placement. The Council offered a remedy for the injustice which the complainant considered insufficient. We have recommended actions to add to the Council’s remedy, which the Council has accepted.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because the courts are better placed to consider the complaint.

Summary: Mrs X complained the home to school transport arranged by the Council did not wait long enough for her grandchild Y and that it was not meeting Y’s needs. The Council already accepted fault as the transport did not consistently wait the agreed ten minutes for Y. It apologised and made a payment to Mrs X for the time and trouble this caused. This was a suitable remedy. There was no evidence of other fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a safeguarding concern raised in 2022. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons to consider now.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the increased cost of the Council’s garden waste service this year. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to pursue a Code of Conduct complaint made against a Councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with applications for prior approval. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a compensation claim as there is no worthwhile outcome to be achieved by our investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to provide school transport for her child from the school to Ms X’s work address. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s alleged failure to properly address a longstanding complaint about noise nuisance taking place in Mrs X’s area. This is because most of this complaint is out of jurisdiction on time. An investigation into the remaining parts of the complaint would be unlikely to result in finding fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because the complainant has not suffered significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.