LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the handling of a rent account for supported accommodation. There is no good reason to investigate old events when the law says we should not, and we could not say the claimed injustice stems from the alleged faults or achieve more for the complainant than the position in the Council’s response from 15 months ago.

Summary: We will not investigate this council tax complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice.

Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of her father’s financial assessment. The Council accepts it did not deal with it properly and has apologised for the inconvenience it has caused. It has also reminded officers of the need to communicate with people effectively. The Council also needs to make symbolic payments to Ms X and her parents. It also needs to take further action to improve its working practices.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council charging Ms X for council tax. This is because t

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to meet the statutory timescale when issuing an Education, Health and Care Plan and failed to provide her son with a suitable education for over a year causing distress. The Council accepts it did not issue the final plan within the statutory timescales. We have seen no evidence that it provided a suitable education that was available and accessible from January 2023 to September 2023. A suitable remedy is agreed.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council regularly sends threating council tax letters. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s delay when reviewing his Education, Health and Care Plan. We found the Council to be at fault. It did not circulate information before the scheduled review meeting and took too long to tell Mr X his Plan would be amended. This caused Mr X avoidable distress and anxiety. To remedy this injustice, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment and take action to improve its timeliness.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council failed to respond to her representations against a penalty charge notice. This is because Mrs X has challenged the Council’s escalation of the case with the Traffic Enforcement Centre at Northampton County Court.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about two penalty charge notices issued by the Council. This is because the validity of the penalty charge notices is a matter for the appeals process and it would be reasonable for Miss X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre at Northampton County Court to reinstate this right.

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

Summary: There was fault the Council delayed issuing a final Education, Health, and Care Plan for Miss X’s daughter in 2022 and 2023. This fault caused Miss X an injustice because of avoidable uncertainty and a delayed right to appeal the Council’s final decision. There was also fault in how the Council evidenced its consideration of Miss X’s request for Elective Home Education and then a request for support while home schooling. The Council have agreed to remedy Miss X’s injustice in line with my recommendations.

Summary: Mr X complained contractors working on behalf of the Council to install a dropped kerb at his property, wrongly used a skip at his property for the rubble when the contract required the rubble to be disposed of elsewhere. Mr X says the contractors did not remove all the rubble and so he was not able to fully utilise his skip. We have discontinued the investigation as it is not possible to take a view on whether a significant amount of rubble was left in the skip and further investigation is unlikely to clarify this.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council prevented her from accessing her temporary accommodation and belongings. She also complained the Council did not provide her with advice about homelessness and did not provide her with further temporary accommodation. We have discontinued our investigation because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mrs X complained about a delay in the service, commissioned for Mr Y by the Council, seeking medical advice following a sudden change in his mobility. She also complained about the response to her complaint about this. She says Mr Y was not the same person after these events and it caused the family “emotional damage”. We find the Care Provider did delay seeking medical advice and the Council’s safeguarding enquiry could have been better. We recommended the Council apologise, pay Mrs X £500 and reimburse Mr Y’s contribution to his care for a short period. It should also make sure safe

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to consider mitigating circumstances that she presented to the Council at the same time that she paid a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). She complained the Council failed to consider whether to exercise discretion and waive the penalty fee. We found the Council was not at fault.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council has failed to consider information about her housing application which has resulted in her being offered unsuitable accommodation. The Ombudsman finds find fault with the Council for it how it communicated with Miss X about her eligibility to its housing register. The Ombudsman does find fault with the Council for how it considered any risk posed to Miss X. The Council has agreed to make a payment, a further direct offer of housing and service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to enforce against windows in an administrative building across from her house which breach a 2016 planning permission. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s enforcement decision to warrant us investigating.

Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about a rent advance loan from the Council in 2020. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner.

Summary: A man complained about the Council’s decision to end its housing duty in his case because he was intentionally homeless. But we will not investigate this complaint because the man has a right of appeal to court if he wants to challenge that decision, and we cannot achieve the outcome he is seeking in that respect.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council delayed deciding its housing duty and left him unsure about its decision and his rights. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for failing to reasonably explore the circumstances of Mr X’s homelessness application. The Ombudsman also finds fault with the Council for delaying its decision on Mr X’s homelessness application, which delayed Mr X’s right to a suitability review. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council for how it provided support to Mr X as someone previously in care. The Council has agreed to pay a financial remedy and carry out s

Summary: Ms X complains the Council did not make her a suitable offer of accommodation while she was in temporary accommodation. The Council was not at fault for failing to offer Ms X suitable accommodation. There was some fault with how the Council communicated with Ms X and the time taken to respond to Ms X’s complaint. This did not cause Ms X any significant injustice.

Summary: There was no fault by the Council. The Council considered the request for Miss X to make a homeless application but made a decision that it was reasonable for her to remain in her housing association flat without fault. Miss X’s request for a review of the suitability of her accommodation was late and so there was no fault in the Council not accepting the request. There is no evidence the Council was asked to protect her belongings when she moved.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the wording the Council used in a letter after the complainant applied for a Freedom Pass. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Ms X complained about delays with getting professional advice and issuing an Education and Health Care Plan (EHCP) for her daughter (Z). She also complained about the Council’s unsatisfactory communication throughout the EHCP process. Ms X said the Council’s failings had detrimental effect on Z at the critical stage of her education, caused them distress and resulted in the family’s financial difficulties. We find the Council at fault for failing to comply with the EHCP timescales and to effectively communicate with Ms X. The Council has accepted our recommendations for personal remed

Summary: Mr X complained he was formally short-listed as first for a social housing property, but it was let to someone else. Mr X said it affected his mental health. He said it caused him uncertainty and unnecessary distress, and cost him time and trouble. We do not find the Council at fault.