LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application and maintenance of heating in social rented property. It is reasonable for Mr X to ask the Council to review his housing application banding and we have no jurisdiction not investigate complaints about housing management by social housing landlords.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about penalty charge notices being incorrectly issued as there is insufficient remaining injustice caused to the complainant to warrant our further involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to properly consider her circumstances when refusing her application to join the housing register. This caused her distress as she is isolated from her family and unable to return to the area where she grew up. There is no fault by the Council in refusing to add Miss X to the housing register but it should have done more to signpost her to other housing advice including to make a homeless application. A suitable remedy is agreed.

Summary: Mrs H complains the Council allowed her application for a disability band reduction on her council tax, but later said it had made an error and she did not qualify for a reduction. But she had reasons why the Council’s decision was wrong. Our decision is there was fault in how the Council carried out the first assessment. The Council has agreed to our recommendations.

Summary: We will not investigate this council tax complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about delay processing her housing application, her housing register priority and housing disrepair. There was delay in processing her application but there is insufficient outstanding injustice for us to investigate, insufficient evidence of fault in the priority banding decision and the Housing Ombudsman is better placed to consider her complaint about property disrepair.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about how the Council has handled her housing application. We could not achieve anything more than the Council’s investigation and there is insufficient evidence of fault in its recent decision regarding her priority banding to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an assisted waste collection. The Council has upheld the complaint, made service improvements, and provided a financial remedy. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Miss X complained about failings in respect of special educational needs, health care, safeguarding and social care for two of her children. During the course of our investigation, we found out Miss X had made a judicial review application. As a result, the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to consider her complaint.

Summary: Mr P complains about the Council’s delay in dealing with his application to join its housing register. He also complains the Council did not give him information about how he could bid.­ We uphold the complaint. In response to our investigation, the Council has offered a remedy, which is adequate.

Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s actions in its child protection involvement with her family because it lies outside our jurisdiction. This is because the matter is subject to ongoing court proceedings. The law says we cannot consider complaints about matters that are being, or have been, considered in court. We have no discretion to do so.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s adoption of the right to challenge parking policy. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to update her housing register application to allow her to bid on three-bedroom properties since August 2022. A system error prevented Miss X bidding on three-bedroom properties between August and November 2022. That was fault but it did not cause significant injustice to Miss X. Miss X has been able to bid appropriately since November 2022 however poor communication from the Council did not make this clear. The Council has agreed to make a payment to recognise the uncertainty this caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to decline his blue badge application and about delay in it completing a reassessment. This is because the alleged fault has not caused any significant injustice. In addition, an investigation would not lead to any further findings or outcomes.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council has provided temporary accommodation that is unsuitable for her and her family. We found fault by the Council because it did not consider its legal duty to find Miss X and her family suitable temporary accommodation, and they remain in unsuitable accommodation. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to remedy the injustice to Miss X.

Summary: Miss X complains that the Council delayed in lifting the suspension on her housing register application. The Council is at fault as it delayed in lifting the suspension on her housing register application and its requests for documentation lacked clarity. The delay caused distress to Miss X which the Council has agreed to remedy by apologising and making a symbolic payment to her.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council wrongly issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged moving traffic contravention. This is because Mr B put in an appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the determination of a Council tax reduction claim as there is no evidence of fault by the Council and there was a right of appeal to a tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the increased cost of a penalty charge notice as there is insufficient evidence that Mr X’s claimed injustice arises solely from Council fault or of sufficient injustice to justify our involvement plus we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council withdrawing therapy support. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council decided to end the service to justify an Ombudsman investigation.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council provided her with unsuitable temporary accommodation and failed to offer her alternative suitable accommodation. We found fault by the Council because it did not consider its legal duty to find suitable temporary accommodation for Miss X and her children. As a result, Miss X and her children remained in unsuitable accommodation for longer than they should have. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to remedy the injustice to Miss X.

Summary: Mr B complains the Council delayed updating his housing application. The Council was at fault. We consider it has provided an appropriate remedy.

Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council handled his housing register application. He said this had an impact on his mental health, and caused unnecessary uncertainty. We have discontinued our investigation into this complaint. This is because Mr X has a right to appeal a Council decision, which supersedes his complaint, and because we cannot achieve the outcomes Mr X wants.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s children’s social care provision because the complaint is out of time.