LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to raise safeguarding concerns about an injury to the complainants mother’s knee injury. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council have not applied deductions to his council tax arrears that it should have. Mr X also complains about how the Council processed his council tax account and application for Council Tax Support Discretionary Discount. Based on the information available, I have found fault in how the Council responded to Mr X’s application. The Council have agreed to our recommendations.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage caused to the complainant’s property by a tree on the public highway. This is because we

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to act on his request for a review of its decision on his homelessness application from February 2020. We will

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax liability. It would be reasonable for the complainant to appeal against the bill at the Valuation Tribunal, and we cannot investigate the Council taking court action for enforcement and recovery of an unpaid council tax bill.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide her son with free transport to school. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council for us to be able to question the merits of its decisions.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council failed to pay him direct payments. That is because Mr X’s complaint is late as it would have been reasonable for him to complain to us earlier. He has also taken court action in respect of the Council’s most recent Care Act assessment. We cannot investigate a complaint that has been considered by the court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council issued him a duplicate penalty charge notice. This is because the matter did not cause Mr X significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax liability. Part of the period has already been considered by a court of law and it would be reasonable for the complainant to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal against any demand from the Council for the current year. There is no fault in the Council not awarding council tax support if the taxpayer has not made a claim for it, regardless of whether the person is entitled separately to Universal Credit.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delayed response to his request/appeal about a parking fine. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Court to make a late statutory declaration.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to award a Blue Badge. This is because the Council has offered to do a further assessment and it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaints which are inextricably linked with his child’s care, as the Court is currently considering the child’s care. Social Work England is better placed to consider his complaints about professional conduct.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for a moving traffic offence. This is because the complainant can appeal to the tribunal.

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council has recovered housing benefit from him as a landlord. We will not investigate this complaint because the complaint is out of time and could be (and was) appealed to a tribunal.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision on his homelessness application. The Ombudsman found the Council at fault for delays and errors in its decision-making process which the Council agreed to remedy. However, the Ombudsman did not find fault in the Council’s final decision about Mr X’s homelessness.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s delay responding to his freedom of information request. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to complain to the Information Commissioner, and if needed, appeal to the tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax liability. It is about the start of court action and involves issues that have already been considered by the courts. It would also have been reasonable for the complainants to use their right to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal if they thought they should not pay the original demands or claim council tax support if they believe they could not afford to pay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in responding to Ms X’s Code of Conduct complaint made against a local councillor. This is because there is insufficient injustice caused to Ms X to warrant an investigation.

Summary: The complainants Mr X and Ms Y complained the Council failed to properly consider a planning application for a significant extension to their neighbour’s property. They say the Council failed to honour its commitment to decide the application at Planning Committee denying them further opportunities to challenge the proposals. The Council says it followed correct procedure, considered all relevant information, and used delegated powers to decide the application under its Scheme of Delegation. We found the Council acted with fault and it agreed to apologise, pay £300 in recognition of t