LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council completed a mental capacity assessment before the complainant’s late mother was discharged from hospital in June 2025. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint that his motorbike was damaged by a pothole which the Council had failed to repair properly. This is because it is reasonable for Mr C to take the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that Council crematorium staff scattered her relative’s ashes without the family’s consent. It is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation or achieve anything more.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint, brought by Mr Y, about the Council incorrectly sending her a letter about care fees for her late parents, and the Council’s data management. Investigation would not achieve a different outcome. We cannot achieve the data management outcome Mr Y seeks. There is no good reason for us to investigate the Council’s use of data as the Information Commissioner’s Office is the body better placed to consider this.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to a neighbour dispute which was dealt with by its adult social care and environmental protection teams. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the disposal of her old stair lift as the complaint is late and there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education, Health and Care Plan process for Mrs X’s child. This is because Mrs X appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability). This places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council reported inaccurate information about the number of people who visit the area. This is because the issue has not caused Mr X a significant personal injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for Mr X’s property before he bought it. We consider that any errors in the planning application process did not cause Mr X any injustice and we cannot achieve the outcome he is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to properly respond to Mr X’s questions regarding his council tax account. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions. In addition, the Valuation Tribunal is best placed to investigate matters of council tax liability.

We will not investigate this complaint about a care home commissioned by the Council charging additional fees to Mrs X. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate it. We also will not investigate the complaint about the Council not informing Mrs X’s family that she may be able to apply for Continuing Health Care funding. This is because any fault by the Council would not have caused a significant enough injustice to justify an investigation.

Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to deliver education to her son while he could not attend school. We have found that the Council was not at fault for its offer of education. It considered its duties and made a decision which was not unreasonable. It was, however, at fault for providing Mrs X with some incorrect information. This did not cause Mrs X a significant injustice, and therefore we have recommended no further action.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about noise nuisance, planning breaches and breaches of licensing restrictions from a neighbouring hotel premises. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about rights of way because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and the courts are better placed to consider the complaint.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about how a Council has exercised its safeguarding duties. The law says we cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about domiciliary care. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her child, Y’s Education, Health and Care needs assessment process. Mrs X had a right of appeal to a tribunal if she disagreed with the content of the plan, which it was reasonable for her to use. We could not require the Council to conduct a fresh educational psychologist assessment and so cannot achieve what she wants.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about repair issues at private accommodation as the complaint is made late and there are not good reasons to investigate now.

We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about the contents of a Section 7 report. The law prevents us from investigating matters that are subject to court proceedings. And an investigation into a social worker’s actions would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s involvement with her children. Further investigation by us could not add to the Council’s responses to Miss X. Some of her complaints are late or outside our jurisdiction. The Council has not had the chance to respond to Miss X’s complaint about advocacy for her child.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about alleged damage to two cars. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because it is a matter that needs to be determined in court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in dealing with his late father Mr Y’s care fees and it not always contacting him directly about the fees. There is insufficient significant personal injustice caused to Mr X by the matters complained of to warrant us investigating. We also cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks from his complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to respond to Mr X’s requests for information, and not considering his requests for disability adjustments. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to consider the first part of this matter, and only the courts can decide whether an organisation has met its Equality Act 2010 duties.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the conduct of a Council registrar. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault, further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome, and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.