LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of Miss X’s traffic penalty appeal. There was no fault in the way the penalty was processed and Miss X has exercised her right of appeal to the independent parking Adjudicator at the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled the collection of council tax. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault and because the matter is subject to the start of court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the suitability of temporary accommodation and the banding of Miss X’s housing application. It was reasonable for Miss X to challenge the suitability of accommodation in the courts and there is insufficient evidence of fault in the assessment of her application which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms C’s complaint about the Council’s failure to inform her of the death of her brother, Mr B, at the earliest opportunity. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

Summary: Miss B complained the Council did not award her the correct housing priority and wrongly assessed her homelessness application. Miss B said the Council left her in unsuitable accommodation and this affected her health. We did not found fault with the Council.

Summary: Miss B complained the Council did not take enforcement action against her landlord for disrepair. Miss B said she had to live in disrepair, and this affected her health. We did not found fault with the Council.

Summary: Mrs B has complained that the Council did not properly consider her difficulty walking when refusing a Blue Badge. The Ombudsman has found fault in that the Council did not take all relevant factors into account when conducting a telephone assessment and review. However, the Council has since carried out a face-to-face assessment which the Ombudsman considers a suitable remedy for any injustice from the earlier assessments.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council failed to respond to and investigate her complaints about a resident trading cars from their property causing a nuisance by parking cars on the road. We found fault by the Council as it failed to respond to Ms X’s formal complaints about the matter. But this fault has not caused a significant injustice to Ms X. The Council is now taking the action Ms X was seeking so we are completing our investigation.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the refusal of a school to reconsider its decision to permanently exclude Mr X’s child following the recommendation of an Independent Review Panel. There is an absolute bar that prevents us investigating the action of a school.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to tell Ms X about the results of its inspection of her rented home. Any fault caused by its failure to write to her has not resulted in any significant injustice to Ms X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that Miss X lost the opportunity to pay a penalty charge notice at the discounted rate as this was not caused by any Council fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that Mr X did not receive notification of a penalty charge notice. This is because there is a procedure in law that Mr X can use to remedy this, and it is reasonable to expect him to follow this process.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s use of its unreasonably persistent complainants policy. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has unreasonably ended its homelessness duty in a woman’s case after she refused an offer of accommodation. This is because the woman has statutory review and appeal rights she can use to challenge the Council’s decision.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council’s enforcement agent is recovering a penalty charge notice debt. Mr X is using his legal remedy by challenging the debt recovery at the County Court’s Traffic Enforcement Centre.

Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s planning decision allowing development at the property next door to her home. We will not investigate the complaint because an investigation is unlikely to add to the investigation already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We found no fault in how the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission for development near Mr X’s home.

Summary: We found no fault in how the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission for development near Mr X’s home.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about charges for social care and related matters. This is because we are unable to achieve the outcome requested and cancel the charges complained about. And it would be reasonable to ask the Council for a review if the complainant continues to remain dissatisfied.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with t reports that a charity it supports is guilty of fraud, and that the Council has failed to properly respond to the complainants request for information about this. This is because some elements happened too long ago, it is unlikely we would find fault in how the Council dealt with more recent matters and the Information Commissioner is better placed to deal with complaints about how bodies respond to requests for information.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s planning department or how the Council dealt with a Freedom of Information request. This is because the complainant has appealed to the Planning Inspector and his concerns about how the Council dealt with his request for information are best dealt with by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax liability because Mr X can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: The Council was at fault when it refused to escalate Mrs X’s complaints to stage 2 of the statutory children’s complaints procedures, after considering them at stage 1. It has agreed to start the stage 2 investigation without delay and make service improvements to prevent a reoccurrence of the faults identified.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice as it is reasonable to expect Mrs X to have appealed against it to London Tribunals.