LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her council tax debt. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about poor communication because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to honour the original rate Mr X was offered for a burial plot. This is because an investigation would not provide Mr X with a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council allowing a café to open on bank holidays as a non-material amendment to a planning permission. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or injustice to Ms X to warrant investigation by us.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision she needs to pay for a replacement bin after hers was damaged. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered a planning application. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify our involvement. And we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to prune a tree. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to take planning enforcement action against works at a property next to the complainant, and for failing to adequately deal with his associated complaint. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the planning enforcement matters, and it would not be a good use of our resources to investigate the complaints process in isolation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about issues related to the Council’s attempts to acquire land from the complaint. This is primarily because it is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner, and to continue to raise his freedom of information concerns with the Information Commissioner. We also could not achieve a worthwhile outcome for the complainant in relation to the Council’s handling of the negotiation process.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council deciding not to take enforcement action against a firm which leases a site near his property, allowing the firm to apply for retrospective planning permission, and delay in that application process. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s enforcement process to warrant investigation. Even if we were to investigate, there is insufficient significant injustice stemming from the enforcement decision to justify us investigating. Investigation of the planning application process would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision-making process relating to his and a neighbour’s planning application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council charging for a replacement bin. This is because an investigation would not be a good use of our limited resources or achieve a meaningful outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council charging her for a replacement bin. This is because an investigation would not be a good use of our limited resources or achieve a meaningful outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: We found no fault on Mr and Mrs D’s complaint about the Council’s decision to take no action on their high hedge complaint about their neighbours’ trees, which they said impacted on their amenities. The Council properly considered their complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax liability. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect council tax liability to be appealed to the specialist tribunal that decides liability.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council has delayed serving an improvement notice about his home and not dealt with enforcement properly regarding his landlord. The Council is at fault because it delayed dealing with problems Mr X reported about the condition of his home. Mr X had to live in substandard accommodation for too long and has been evicted earlier than he should have been. The Council should apologise and pay Mr X £400 for distress and uncertainty.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s response when she reported breaches of planning permission on a development site near her home. She also complained that the Council failed to follow due process when granting planning permission to increase the number of houses on the site. We found the Council was at fault in failing to update Mrs X and in failing to show it considered case law she referred to. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X. We did not uphold the remainder of Mrs X’s complaint.

Summary: Miss N, complains the Council did not respond to her application for an exemption to her council tax, so leading to the avoidable distress of a bailiff’s visit. When it did respond, it did not advise her of her right to appeal the Council’s new decision. Our decision is there was fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to our recommendations.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to respond properly to his complaints about his neighbour’s behaviour. There was no fault in how the Council investigated Mr X’s complaints about his neighbour. However, the Council was at fault when it said it would refer one of Mr X’s concerns to the community safety team and failed to do so and when it failed to inform Mr X of the outcome of its noise nuisance investigation. The Council has agreed apologise to Mr X for any frustration or confusion this caused him.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about The Council recovering unpaid council tax from Miss X. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of a planning application and its decision to allow development on greenfield land. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on a code of conduct complaint against town councillors. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Borough Council causing the complainant a significant personal injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s valuation of a property under the right to buy scheme. This is because the complainant could have appealed to the District Valuer. Furthermore, the complaint is made late.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council wrongly advised his buyers that he had not built a new house in accordance with the approved plans. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to make an application to challenge the Council’s view and to appeal against any refusal.