LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: The Council failed to make sure that Mrs X’s child received the speech and language therapy set out in their Education Health and Care Plan. It also failed to make sure that the therapist circulated a report in time for the annual review of the Plan. This caused Mrs X distress and frustration, and meant that her child missed speech and language therapy for over a year. I have recommended the Council make a symbolic payment in recognition of the therapy Mrs X’s child missed out on.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that she broke her ankle after tripping on a damaged pavement. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs B to pursue her compensation claim by taking the Council to court.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not provide her child, Y, with alternative provision when she stopped attending school and it failed to provide her with the provision in her Education, Health and Care Plan. Mrs X also complained the Council failed to provide Y with a personal budget to secure the provisions in her Plan and about its delays with the annual review process of her Plan. There were faults by the Council which caused injustice to Y and Mrs X. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s actions relating to a planning breach at a property near to his. We do not find any fault in the Council’s actions. The Council has sufficiently considered the breach and chosen not to take any enforcement action. This is a decision for the Council to make. We do not uphold this complaint.

Summary: There was fault by the Council. It took too long to issue a final Education Health and Care Plan to Mr K; did not complete a transport assessment nor offer funding for travel to college in good time; did not always communicate with his mother, Mrs X properly; and did not make a personal budget available to Mr K to pay for the provision set out in his Plan. This caused Mr K and Mrs X distress and uncertainty. It meant that Mr K did not receive all of his provision. The Council should apologise to Mrs X and Mr K. It should make symbolic payments in recognition of the impact on Mrs X and

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s consultation and process regarding a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) to change a speed limit on part of a local road, and how it dealt with his complaint. There is not enough significant personal injustice to Mr X caused by the matters complained of to warrant investigation. We do not investigate council complaint‑handling where we are not investigating the core issue giving rise to the complaint. We also cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a housing application. This is mainly because there is not enough evidence of fault significantly disadvantaging Miss X.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint about the Council’s failure to complete an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment for Miss X’s child within the statutory timescale. The Council has agreed to provide a proportionate remedy and this removes the need for us to investigate.

Summary: Dr X complained the Council delayed finalising her daughter’s Education, Health and Care plan and failed to ensure suitable education was provided during this period. We have found the Council was at fault. It caused a delay of thirteen months. This likely meant Dr X’s daughter missed out on the education and support she needed. The Council has agreed to take action to address the injustice.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint about the Council’s failure to complete an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment for Mrs X’s child within the statutory timescale. The Council has agreed to provide a proportionate remedy and this removes the need for us to investigate.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education, Health and Care plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by the delay.

Summary: We have upheld this complaint about the Council’s failure to complete an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment for Mrs X’s child within the statutory timescale. The Council has agreed to provide a proportionate remedy and this removes the need for us to investigate.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s delays during the Education, Health and Care needs assessment process for her son. She also complained the Council failed to provide her son with suitable alternative provision. We find the Council was at fault for its delay in issuing Mrs X’s son’s Education, Health and Care Plan. It was also at fault for how it handled Mrs X’s son’s alternative provision. These faults caused Mrs X frustration and uncertainty, and Mrs X’s son missed out on provision. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X and make payments to her.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s planning applications. This is because Mr X had a right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate which it would have been reasonable for him to use.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because part of the complaint is late. It is also unlikely we would find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council issuing him several lots of Penalty Charge Notices. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and a further investigation would not achieve anything more.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about damage to his property caused by Council owned trees. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to take the matter to court to achieve the outcome he seeks.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a grant of planning permission in 2020. There are no reasons to justify an investigation of matters known to Mrs X for more than 12 months. We will not investigate the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action as it is unlikely we would find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education, Health and Care plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by the delay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education, Health and Care plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by the delay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment process. The Council has already upheld this complaint and made an offer of a suitable remedy for the injustice. There are no wider public interest issues to justify an investigation.

We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application near his home and its handling of his complaint about the matter. The substantive complaint is late and it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures alone.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to investigate the behaviour of Parish Councillors. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. We cannot investigate the actions of Parish Councils.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education, Health and Care plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by the delay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Education, Health and Care plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by the delay.