LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to withdraw post 16 travel assistance. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Mr X’s reports to it of a highway obstruction as Mr X is not caused a level of personal injustice from this to justify our further involvement.

Summary: Ms X complained how the independent appeal panel dealt with her appeal for a place for her daughter at her preferred secondary school. We find some fault in how the panel handled Ms X’s appeal. This means she cannot be satisfied the process was carried out fairly. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and carry out a new appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s conduct of a safeguarding investigation and the Council’s complaint handling. Doing so would not be likely to lead to any worthwhile outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax exemptions because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with repairs to a public right of way. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We cannot investigate part of Mrs X’s complaint about the removal of her children in 2008 because the matters complained about were considered by a court. We will not investigate part of the complaint because it is late. We will not investigate the remainder because Mrs X could raise it as part of ongoing legal proceedings or raise the matter with the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to a child protection referral made regarding Ms X’s children. The Council operated the statutory children’s complaints process and offered Ms X a remedy for fault found. Were we to investigate, it is unlikely we would find fault with how the Council dealt with the complaint, or recommend further remedy.

Summary: The Council was at fault. It failed to provide all Miss X’s child, Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan provision, did not put in place a personal budget for Y’s provision and failed to carry out Y’s 2023 and 2024 EHC annual reviews in line with the statutory timescales. The Council will apologise to Y, make a symbolic payment to Miss X to acknowledge the impact of Y’s lost provision and the frustration, uncertainty and confusion it caused her and her delayed appeal rights. It has already put some service improvements in place but will also make a service improvement for putting

Summary: We will not investigate how the Council dealt with Mr X’s subject access requests as this is best dealt with by the Information Commissioner's Office.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions following a data protection breach as this is best dealt with by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council had failed to provide a reliable escort to take her disabled son to school, as required. The Council has investigated the complaints and accepted fault. We agree with the Council’s findings, but we considered that there should be a symbolic payment to recognise the avoidable distress and inconvenience caused to the family. The Council has agreed to this. We are therefore closing the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of the Education and Health Care Plan process. This is because the Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused by its delay and it is unlikely further investigation would achieve significantly more for Miss X.

Summary: Miss X complained about a failure to put alternative provision in place for her child, Y, between 2024 and 2025, delayed annual reviews and a failure to update Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. The Council failed to provide adequate oversight of Y’s provision between January and July 2024 and then failed to put any education in place for Y between September 2024 and January 2025 when they were not on roll at any school. It also delayed amending Y’s EHC Plan by five months following an annual review. The Council agreed to apologise and make payments to acknowledge the injustic

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council carried out a care needs assessment. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council has not met its legal duties to support his Special Guardianship Order. He says this has impacted the emotional wellbeing of his family. We find the Council at fault which caused injustice. The Council will apologise and make a payment to Mr X. The Council will also make a fresh decision.

Summary: We ended our investigation about free school meal payments. Miss X should have complained to us sooner and she had already used her appeal rights to the special educational needs and disabilities Tribunal.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about children services’ actions which have been and will be raised in Court proceedings. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider his data protection complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his reports of property disrepair. That is because the early part of his complaint is late and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement in more recent matters.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that, after increasing his banding in 2025, the Council refused to backdate his priority date to when he joined its register in 2023. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify an investigation.

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council handled his waste collections. He stated on several occasions the Council failed to collect his bins, did not fully empty them, and did not return them to his property. The Council was at fault for several missed collections and for not fully emptying Mr X’s bins. It apologised to Mr X for the lack of service. We found the apology suitable to remedy Mr X’s injustice. The Council agreed to carry out further monitoring for two months to ensure Mr X’s bins are fully emptied.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to issue a warning letter before moving Mrs X to different temporary accommodation. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about advice the complainant alleges the Council gave to his tenant. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and the complainant could take legal action.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a prior approval application as have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. Also, we do not consider the complainant has suffered significant injustice because of the way the Council considered the application and we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not taking action against a property developer. It is unlikely we would find fault.