LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council’s actions relating to her claim for compensation for damage to her property. This is because the actions complained about cannot be separated from the substantive matter, which is for the courts to decide.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to approve Mr X’s application for a vehicle crossing. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a width restriction installed on a road by the Council. There is no statutory obligation on the Council to follow the Government guidance. And we cannot decide whether the Council is liable for damage to the complainant’s car. It is reasonable for him to pursue his claim for compensation in court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to consider its duty under the Equality Act in deciding to raise allotment fees. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant our involvement and Mr X has the choice as to whether to pay the fee or not. Any fault by the Council cannot therefore be said to cause Mr X a direct injustice.

Summary: Mr X complains about the introduction of an experimental traffic order on a road he lives near to. He also complains about the engagement exercise the Council completed and says it was not fit for purpose. We find fault with the Council for failing to keep accurate records of its decision making in relation to who to consult with during the engagement exercise. However, we do not consider the fault identified caused any injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to issue a Certificate of Lawful Use or Development. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The complainant has not suffered any personal injustice because of the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to take enforce a planning condition which it imposed to protect the complainants amenity. This is because the events happened too long ago, and I see no reason why the matter could not have been raised sooner.

Summary: Ms X complained that the Council did not act on safeguarding concerns she raised, about a lack of support for her as a foster carer, and about the way the Council handled her complaint. Ms X said this caused frustration and concern. Largely we do not find the Council at fault. However, we find the Council at fault for failing to log Ms X’s complaint. As recommended by the Ombudsman, the Council has apologised to Ms X for the injustice caused by this failure.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council has demanded council tax from 2004-08 due to its error in paying a discount. The complaint is resolved because the Council has written off the debt which is a fair outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because the complainant could have used the statutory process and appealed to the tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about whether the Council’s children services team should have spoken directly with a child. The Courts are now considering the child’s care and we cannot investigate the same issues it is considering.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax liability and council tax support. It would be reasonable for the complainant to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. We will also not investigate parts of the complaint about fraud and the Council causing him to lose his business. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

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

Summary: Miss B complained that the Council failed to provide alternative education to her child, C when they were unable to attend school for medical reasons and delayed in considering her complaint. We found the Council did not provide alternative education for C for approximately eight months. We recognise the complications caused by the COVID-19 pandemic but still consider this fault caused Miss B and C significant injustice. The Council has agreed to pay Miss B and C a total of £2000. It has already taken action to improve its procedures.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council pursuing an unpaid parking penalty charge. There is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions on a reported breach of planning control. The complaint is late, and I have seen no good reasons to exercise our discretion to investigate it.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council calculated the complainant’s housing benefit and raised an overpayment. This is because the complainant can use her review and appeal rights.

Summary: The Council is at fault for delaying consideration of this complaint at stage one of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council has agreed to consider the complaint at stage one of the procedure without further delay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council delayed in replacing Ms Y’s washing machine and completing plumbing repairs to her home. That is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant further investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to refund the complainant’s leisure centre membership fees. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council supported him while leaving the Council’s care. The Council failed to arrange a personal adviser for Mr X when it should have done and unnecessarily delayed investigating Mr X’s complaint. This caused Mr X avoidable uncertainty, frustration, time and trouble for which the Council agree to apologise and pay him a financial remedy. It also agreed to review the training and guidance it provides to its social workers.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s children’s services involvement with the complainants family. This is because we cannot add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant seeks.

Summary: The Council’s failure to take a homeless application when Miss X said she was at risk of domestic abuse is fault. The Council is also at fault for failing to provide interim accommodation at the earliest opportunity. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Miss X £1,500, and take action to improve its services.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the data the Council holds about the complainant. It would be reasonable for the complainant to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office which is best placed and has legal authority to handle it.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council issued a court summons for not paying council tax. The Council has offered a satisfactory remedy to the complaint. It has apologised, explained what went wrong, and offered £200.