LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her personal information and her related complaint. The Information Commissioner is better placed to deal with the substantive matter and it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures alone.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council was at fault in the way it dealt with her housing and homelessness applications. We have found fault by the Council as it failed to review the prevention duty owed to Ms X. But this has not caused a significant injustice to Ms X. So, we have completed our investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council’s Waste Collection Service wrongly drove on streets with weight restrictions. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that he suffered severe injuries after tripping on a defective pavement. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement with Mr X’s family.

We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because she could have followed the statutory process and appealed to a tribunal. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to have followed this process.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council is issuing parking penalty charge notices unfairly as any motorist impacted by this has the right to appeal to an independent tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate the Council’s handling of Mr X’s request the Council should reimburse him for the care arranged for his late relative. This is because we could not add to the investigation already carried out by the Council.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions as an appointed deputy of Ms X’s property and affairs. We also cannot investigate any matters in relation to the housing association. This is because it is not in our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement in an NHS continuing healthcare funding eligibility decision appeal. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council refusing to renew her residents parking permit. This is because the information does not indicate the Council was at fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council carried out a financial assessment and decided what expense to include. There is not enough evidence of fault and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We found fault by London Borough of Merton and NHS South West London Integrated Care Board as they failed to take appropriate action to promptly resolve disputes around Mrs Y’s care needs. This led to unnecessary delay, which in turn caused Mrs Y and her family avoidable distress and uncertainty. These organisations will apologise to Mrs Y and her family and pay them a financial remedy.

Summary: We found fault by London Borough of Merton and NHS South West London Integrated Care Board as they failed to take appropriate action to promptly resolve disputes around Mrs Y’s care needs. This led to unnecessary delay, which in turn caused Mrs Y and her family avoidable distress and uncertainty. These organisations will apologise to Mrs Y and her family and pay them a financial remedy.

because his objection to the company the Council proposed to carry out an independent investigation does not justify an investigation by us.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs M’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to pay for Spanish lessons for her son. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation, and we could not achieve the outcome Mrs M wants.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his homeless application. We find fault with the Council for delay, and have recommended a symbolic payment to Mr X for the frustration and distress caused.

Summary: Mrs Y complained, on behalf of her late mother, Mrs X, that Woodlands House Care and Nursing did not properly manage Mrs X’s move to the home’s nursing unit, did not follow Mrs X’s care plan in terms of medication and nutrition, and did not identify symptoms of an infection. We found no fault with the Nursing Home’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint about the education her son B missed because much of it is too old and there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigation of more recent events. We cannot investigate Ms M’s complaint once she appealed to the SEND Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council wrongly issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to put in formal representations, and if needed, appeal to London Tribunals.

the Council allocated a school placement to a third party who she says fraudulently used her address when applying. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice he received for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about his grandfather’s care charges. He says his grandfather was told he would receive six weeks of care for free to support his recovery following discharge from hospital, but he was charged. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, the claimed fault has not caused any significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with her concerns about her relative from 2021. This is because most of the complaint is late and even if we exercised discretion to investigate, including the matters within time, it is unlikely we would find sufficient evidence of fault causing a personal injustice to Ms X.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council failing to consider the medical evidence she provided in January 2023. This is because the complaint is late and there are not good reasons to exercise discretion to consider the late complaint. In addition, the likely fault did not cause any injustice.