LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to provide her son with sufficient education or the provision in his education, health and care plan, delayed carrying out an annual review and ignored her emails. The Council delayed completing an annual review but there is no fault in the remainder of the complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Ms X and put in place a process to manage annual reviews.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to enforce the terms of a legal agreement with the builder of the complainant’s home. This is because the complaint is made too late.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a blue badge. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not making all the provision specified in Mrs X’s child’s Education Health and Care Plan when they were not attending the educational setting named in the Plan. Investigation by us would be unlikely to add to the findings of the Council’s own investigation or an increased remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about alternative educational provision for Mrs X’s child. There is not enough evidence of fault causing injustice in the Council’s actions to warrant our further involvement.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s management of the adjoining property. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about the management of social housing by a council acting as a social landlord.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that her car was damaged by a pothole. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs B to take the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled a concern about carbon monoxide. This is because we are unlikely to find fault with has led to significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate the Council’s complaints response to Miss X’s concerns about nuisance from a neighbouring garden. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to properly consider and respond to the complainant’s concerns about the conduct of it officer. Our intervention would not add anything significant to the investigation the Council has carried out or lead to a different outcome, and is not therefore warranted.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to provide suitable education provision for his daughter or the special educational provision detailed in her Education Health and Care Plan. This is because these matters overlap with a tribunal appeal.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to finalise her daughter, Miss Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan within legal timescales. She also complained the Council failed to complete a phased transfer review. Mrs X said this frustrated and distressed her. The Council was at fault, but it has taken appropriate action to remedy any injustice caused by this fault.

Summary: We find the Council at fault because it is not clear if its decision about Mrs X’s child’s delayed school admission was made by the Council or a school headteacher. This caused Mrs X uncertainty and distress. The Council will apologise.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s involvement with his family. Some of Mr X’s concerns are too late for us to consider. It would be reasonable for Mr X to ask the court to consider his remaining concerns.

Summary: We find the Council at fault for failing to make its own decision on Miss X’s request to delay her summer-born child’s start at school. This caused Miss X frustration, distress and uncertainty. The Council will apologise and improve its service.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the content of her child’s Education, Health and Care Plan. This is because it was reasonable for Mrs X to appeal to the First Tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability).

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to provide speech and language therapy for his child, Y, between May 2024 and April 2025. We have discontinued our investigation into Mr X’s complaint. The matters in his complaint were part of his appeal to the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) Tribunal or are too closely linked to the appeal.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed issuing her child’s education, health and care (EHC) Plan, it failed to provide the provision outlined within the Plan and it failed to provide Y with a suitable education when he stopped attending school. The Council is at fault for missing statutory deadlines with regards to issuing the EHC Plan and for failing to consider its Section 19 duty properly. This caused frustration and uncertainty. We are unable to investigate Mrs X’s complaint regarding the provision in the Plan due to restrictions on our jurisdiction. The Council has agreed to remedy

Summary: Ms X complained about a social care assessment leading to a decision to end her care package. There was poor communication and a failure to act in line with Care Act 2014 eligibility regulations which was fault causing avoidable distress, time and trouble and a loss of care services. There is no fault in reducing the hours of care and support allocated to meet Ms X’s needs. The Council will apologise, make payments to Ms X and issue a reminder to council staff to provide details of the appeal procedure and to signpost us at the end of the complaint procedure.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council not ensuring a road serving her property has been properly resurfaced. The law allows Mrs X to take this highway maintenance matter to the Magistrates’ court, which it would not be unreasonable for her to do. This takes her complaint outside of our jurisdiction. It would be reasonable for Mrs X to make any claim of property damage due to the highway’s condition to the Council’s insurers then the courts, if required.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s school admissions appeal panel refusing her appeal. It is unlikely we would find fault which caused Ms X to lose out on a school place.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a school named in her child’s Education Health and Care Plan. This is because she has appealed the decision to a tribunal.

Summary: Miss Y complained about way the Council dealt with her child, Z’s Educational Health Care Plan, special educational needs provision and social care assessments and support. We have found fault by the Council in; failing to respond Miss Y’s request for a re-assessment of Z’s special educational needs, and complete the annual review, within the statutory timescales; and its communication and

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council mis-advised the complainant about making a new housing benefit leading to rent arrears. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the complainant’s council tax. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.