LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Ms X’s application for the housing register. This is because the Council agreed to resolve the complaint by providing a proportionate remedy.

this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application and disrepair and tenancy issues in a Council property. It is reasonable for Mrs X to ask the Council to review her housing application and any new circumstances. We cannot investigate complaints about repairs and tenancy matters by social housing landlords.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about problems the complainant had getting information about her council tax from the Council. This is because the Council has agreed to make a symbolic payment of £50.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to respond to a petition according to its published timeframe. The Council has apologised for the oversight and we do not consider further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council delayed paying the complainant’s housing benefit and did not make an interim payment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about a lack of accessible toilets at a private club. This is because the complaint does not concern an administrative function of the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his homeless application and for not supporting him with his homelessness. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a Discretionary Housing Payment. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council owed him housing benefit. The Council has confirmed it has paid the money owed in full. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision she does not qualify for its housing register because it is reasonable for her to ask for a review of that decision. We will not investigate its handling of her homelessness decision because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council’s refuse collectors are responsible for the damage to her car. 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 Mrs X to go to court.

exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of planning matters associated with a site the complainant had occupied. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner, we cannot look at the court action the Council took against the complainant, and there is not enough evidence of fault regarding the events in 2019.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council sending erroneous council tax credit notifications to Mr X in 2023. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice arising from the Council’s mistake which it promptly corrected within three days.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council has failed to properly consider his circumstances and has wrongly refused to award him Band A* priority on the housing register. The Council’s failure to properly consider, or record, its consideration of Mr X’s circumstances and the holistic impact on his health and his need to move is fault. This fault has caused Mr X an injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning and Environmental enforcement because there is no evidence of fault by the Council causing significant injustice.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council mishandled planning applications and enforcement matters at a neighbouring development. The Ombudsman has discontinued the investigation. That is because further consideration would not lead to a different outcome, and we cannot add to the Council’s investigation.

Summary: The Council failed to properly consider Ms X’s needs as a disabled person, or her basic human rights, when it placed her in interim and temporary accommodation. As a result she and her family have been living in unsuitable accommodation for the past eleven months and the situation is ongoing. During Ms X’s time in the accommodation, she has been largely restricted to being cared for in her bed, unable to wash or shower, use the kitchen or store her wheelchair safely. The Council’s faults have caused Ms X a prolonged period of avoidable distress, indignity, and uncertainty. The Council

Summary: Ms X complains the Council failed to respond to her homeless application, causing distress to her family. We find fault with the Council for not following the correct process and for delay. We have recommended remedies to ensure this does not happen again.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to apply its discretion in how it considered Mr X’s application for business grants. This is because the complaint is made late and there are not good reasons to investigate now.

Summary: there was fault in the way the Council handled Miss X’s request for homelessness assistance. This caused Miss X and her family significant distress and the Council has agreed to provide a suitable remedy.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to repair a fence at one of its properties. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about the management of social housing by councils.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council is responsible for his late council tax reduction claim and loss of benefit. The Council has not caused Mr X injustice.

Summary: Mr X complained about Council’s decision to discharge a planning condition for surface water drainage without properly consulting with the flood authority. We have found the Council was at fault for not doing so, however this did not affect the outcome because retrospective approval for the scheme was given. We are satisfied the injustice to Mr X has already been remedied by the Council subsequent actions, including an apology to Mr X for the failure to properly consult.