LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Ms X complained about the way the Council handled her reports about the condition of her property and that waste was left in her garden prior to her moving in. We have not found the Council at fault for how it responded to Ms X’s reports about the condition of her property but have found the Council at fault for how it dealt with her reports about the waste left in her garden. To remedy the injustice caused the Council agreed to apologise to Ms X and arrange to have the waste removed from her garden.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council delayed carrying out repairs at her temporary accommodation and stopped her from bidding on suitable permanent accommodation while waiting for the repairs to be completed. The Council applied the wrong policy and suspended Miss X’s bidding rights which meant she missed out on several properties resulting in her living in unsuitable accommodation for 15 months. A suitable remedy is agreed.

Summary: Ms X complained that the Council failed to respond or help when her son was unable to attend school, even though he had an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. Ms X also complained about the delay in finalising the amended EHC Plan. We have found fault causing injustice. The Council has accepted the recommended ways to resolve this.

Summary: We cannot by law investigate this complaint about the Council’s child protection involvement with the complainant’s family. This is because all of the issues raised are subject to legal proceedings in court. We have no legal jurisdiction to investigate a complaint in these circumstances.

Summary: Mrs X complains about how the Council has dealt with party wall issues in connection to the neighbouring council-owned property. The law prevents us investigating the Council’s actions regarding the wall.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way Mr X was spoken to by Council staff as there is insufficient remaining injustice caused to him to justify our further involvement and we cannot achieve the outcome he seeks. The complaint is also likely to be outside our legal remit.

Summary: Mr D says the Council failed to consult him about replacing a boundary wall. We have not found evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with the boundary wall issue. We have found evidence of delay in complaints handling. This did not result in an outstanding injustice to Mr D. We have upheld the complaint, because of the delays, and completed the investigation because there is no outstanding injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the care provided by a Care Home. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of Mr X’s council tax account. This is because he has right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal and it would be reasonable for him to use it.

Summary: X complained about the Council’s failure to take account of relevant case law before it granted permission for an application to vary plans it had already approved. We found fault because there was no evidence to show the Council considered an objection about a key planning issue. The Council agreed to remedy the injustice caused by the fault and to carry out a review that might help avoid the same fault happening again.

Summary: We will not investigate Dr B’s complaint about the Council owing his business money. This is because it is reasonable for Dr B to take the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s actions in response to her reports of rubbish and fly-tipping, its decision on how it collects waste from some nearby properties, and its response to her complaint. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making processes to warrant an investigation. We cannot achieve the outcomes Miss X seeks. We do not investigate council complaint-handling where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the contents of an Education Health and Care plan. This is because it is reasonable for the complainant to use their right of appeal to a tribunal.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly charged his mother, Mrs Y, for a period of reablement care which should have been free for up to six weeks. We found fault by the Council for charging Mrs Y for this care. The Council agreed to remove the charges for this period, apologise to Mr X and Mrs Y and make them a symbolic payment in recognition of the avoidable worry and time and trouble caused to them.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed considering a complaint at stages two and three of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council has now agreed to resolve the complaint apologising and offering to make a payment to the complainant to remedy the time and trouble they have been too.

Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the introduction of a traffic order which has resulted in changes to footway parking in the street where Ms X lives. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Ms X could not have complained to us when traffic order was proposed in 2021/22.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about delays in the Council considering her complaint under the statutory children complaints procedure. This is because the Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mrs X by the likely fault.

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council dealt with requests for equipment he needed to aid his everyday life and the Council’s communication with him, including its complaint handling. We found fault because the Council failed to adequately communicate with him and consider what other action it could take when equipment was delayed. To remedy the injustice caused by this fault, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X, make a payment and review some of its processes.

Summary: Mr H complains about the Council’s recovery action for business rates on a property he had given up the lease on. And that it has not paid him the remedy it had offered in its complaint response. Our decision is we agree with the Council’s analysis of fault and remedy. We recommend it contacts Mr H again to offer the remedy.

Summary: Miss Y complains about problems during the build of a Disabled Facilities Grant to adapt her house to meet the needs of her children. The Council has already acknowledged and accepted that some aspects of the workmanship was poor, and that Miss Y and her family experienced an unusual amount of disruption. We agree with the Council’s findings but have recommended additional remedy which the Council has agreed to implement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice and the removal of the complainant’s car to the pound. This is because the problem has been resolved.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not provide suitable transport for her son, Y. We have found no fault with the Council’s actions regarding the provision of school transport for Mrs X’s son.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s applications to the court for liability and charging orders against him for non-payment of business rates. We also cannot determine if Mr X was or is eligible for small business rates relief or, therefore, say he is not liable for the business rates owed. We cannot therefore achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

Summary: The Council was at fault for a delay in finalising Mr B’s financial support. Its social care panel took several months to consider his case, and this caused him a financial injustice, because he continued paying the full cost of his own care for longer than he needed to. The Council’s handling of Mr B’s case also likely caused his son a great deal of uncertainty. It has agreed to make separate remedy payments to Mr B’s estate and to his son, and will set out how it intends to improve its service.

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council dealt with issues about a lift at the rear of his property This is his entrance to his home. Mr X said the Council has not resolved the issues and he is unable to independently leave his home because of this. There was fault by the Council. The Council has to date failed to resolve the issues with the lift. This delay has impacted on Mr X’s independence and ability to access the community. Mr X is continuing to suffer significant ongoing injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a financial payment and resolve the issues Mr X faces.