LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Ms X’s application for a Discretionary Housing Payment because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about her housing register priority banding and that it has not yet made her an offer of accommodation. The Council has now offered her permanent accommodation. An investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome or achieve anything more.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to reimburse the complainant for a taxi fare he paid. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s concerns about the conduct of councillors or her complaint about the terms of an allotment agreement. This is because parts of the complaint are late. It is unlikely we would find fault in relation to the remaining issues complained about.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his noise complaints since 2023. Part of the complaint is late. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement and we are unlikely to achieve a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council reviewed her application which would warrant an investigation. Also we do not consider she has suffered a significant personal injustice from any delay in the review as the Council backdated her new priority banding to the date of her original application.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that a Council officer took a photograph of his property. Any injustice Mr X has suffered is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his homelessness application as there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her housing register application. There is insufficient evidence of injustice to justify our investigation and the Council has since offered social housing.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council has refused approval for works he has done to his home. This is because the Council owns the freehold of the property and the complaint concerns its management of the property, which Mr X owns on a long lease. The law prevents us investigating such actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s requirement that planning permission is obtained before it will sell land. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about health and safety issues at a property the Council uses as temporary accommodation. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s decision-making process.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax arrears and when letters are posted. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the recovery of a housing benefit overpayment. This is because the Council has provided a satisfactory response.

Summary: Ms D says the Council failed to promptly address hazards in her rental home. We have not found evidence of fault by the Council and have completed the investigation and not upheld the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an alleged failure by the Council to properly assess a homelessness application and provide interim accommodation. This is because the subject matter of the complainant’s complaint carries a right of review and appeal to country court which she has been informed of and could reasonably exercise.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s installation of a generator and roof vent in garages opposite the complainant’s home. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. And as the generator has not been used at night, the injustice claimed by the complainant is speculative.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response after the complainant sought advice about potential homelessness. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response.

Summary: We found no fault in how the Council reached its planning decisions for development near Miss X’s home.

Summary: Mr and Mrs M complain the Council did not allow them to bid for an extra bedroom in their attempt to find a new home. The Ombudsman upholds the complaint. The Council’s records show it considered the request from a narrow medical need, rather than also considering social needs. The Council has provided an update that has allowed us to complete our investigation.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council has not dealt with her housing properly. The Council is at fault because it delayed asking for evidence about Miss X’s medical circumstances in August 2020. The provision of housing for Miss X was delayed. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay Miss X £200 for distress.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about personal comments made to Mr X by a member of Council staff. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr X to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council unfairly refused her a business grant and was poor in its communications, causing financial loss and distress. We find no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council refused her businesses grants, did not address her complaint properly and reported inaccurately on finances. We did not investigate the Council’s reporting as there is a more appropriate body. We found fault in the Council’s communications with Mrs X that did not affect its decision making. We recommended the Council provide Mrs X with an apology and address her outstanding complaints, pay £150 for time and trouble and take action to prevent recurrence.