LGO Individual Decisions
33,513 published decisions from the Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman (Jan 2022–Feb 2026). The Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman investigates complaints about councils and registered social care providers in England. Source: lgo.org.uk.
33,513
Total Decisions
11,687
Investigated
9,465
Upheld
81%
Upheld (of investigated)
Showing 199 results matching "London Tribunals"
Transport for London (25-013-245)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled penalty charge notices. This is because Mr X has used his right of appeal to London Tribunals. Therefore his complaint is outside of our jurisdiction.
London Borough of Islington (25-018-361)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a PCN. This is because it would have been reasonable for Ms X to appeal to London Tribunals.
London Borough of Newham (25-012-933)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.
London Borough of Haringey (25-013-433)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Miss Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.
Transport for London (25-010-357)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.
Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames (25-021-385)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate Dr C’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it is reasonable for Dr C to put in formal representations, and if needed, appeal to London Tribunals.
Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (25-011-646)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s late complaint that the Council mishandled his challenge against a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) and related enforcement action. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.
Transport for London (25-012-877)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by Transport for London. This is because it would have been reasonable for Miss X to make formal representations to the Authority and appeal to London Tribunals.
Transport for London (25-011-743)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Traffic Management
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for a road charging scheme contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Ms X to appeal to the London Tribunals.
London Borough of Lambeth (25-020-762)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged moving traffic contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to London Tribunals.
London Borough of Redbridge (25-011-953)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because it would have been reasonable for Miss X to appeal to London Tribunals. Miss X has also now paid the fine at the discounted rate of £55 and this amount is not significant enough to warrant investigation.
Transport for London (25-011-496)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because Mr Y has already appealed to the London Tribunals.
London Borough of Wandsworth (25-018-380)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about whether the Council has the right to enforce parking restrictions on private land as ultimately this can only be determined by a court and/or London Tribunals.
London Borough of Hounslow (25-012-606)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice for allegedly stopping on a restricted bus stop. This is because the complainant has already appealed to the London Tribunals.
London Borough of Redbridge (25-012-984)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking penalty charge notice as it is reasonable to expect the complainant to have appealed it to the London Tribunals.
London Borough of Lambeth (25-018-869)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate Miss C’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it is reasonable for Miss C to put in formal representations to the Council, and if needed, appeal to London Tribunals.
London Borough of Enfield (25-017-557)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a moving traffic penalty charge notice as it is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal against it to London Tribunals.
Transport for London (25-013-206)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Traffic Management
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about TfL’s decision to serve Mrs X with a penalty charge notice. This is because she had right of appeal to the London Tribunals, and she has used it.
Royal Borough of Greenwich (25-015-342)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking penalty charge notice as Mr X can appeal against it to London Tribunals and it is reasonable to expect him to do so.
London Borough of Havering (25-011-799)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate Miss Z’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). There is not enough evidence of fault, and Miss Z had a formal right of appeal initially to the Council and to the London Tribunals which it was reasonable for her to use.
Transport for London (25-016-697)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about emission zone penalty charge notices issued to Mr X. This is because Mr X appealed against them to London Tribunals and as such, this matter is no longer within our legal remit.
London Borough of Redbridge (25-013-464)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the London Tribunals.
London Borough of Newham (25-008-465)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that Mr Y’s vehicle was towed away without proper notice as it is reasonable to expect the complainant to appeal to the London Tribunals.
London Borough of Lambeth (25-009-458)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the London Tribunals.
London Borough of Newham (25-012-981)
Transport And Highways
Other
Subject: Parking And Other Penalties
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about moving traffic Penalty Charge Notices. It is reasonable for Mr X to submit a statutory declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Centre, and if successful, to then use his statutory right of appeal to London Tribunals.
Upheld
9,465
LGO found fault with the organisation complained about.
Not Upheld
2,222
Complaint investigated but no fault found.
Closed / Other
21,826
Closed after initial enquiries, resolved early, or withdrawn.
Most complained-about:
Birmingham City Council (912), Essex County Council (669), Kent County Council (530), Surrey County Council (523), Transport for London (432).
Investigated Decisions Over Time
Excludes 21,826 closed after initial enquiries. Quarterly, by outcome.
Annual Complaints (LGO-wide)
Official annual statistics across all organisations
| Year | Received | Investigated | Upheld | Upheld % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-25 | 39,320 | 8,596 | 7,104 | 82.6% |
Decisions by Sector
Sectors by Upheld Rate
Which sectors have the highest upheld rate?
| Sector | Decisions | Upheld | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Education | 5,609 | 3,193 | 57% |
| Adult Care Services | 5,168 | 2,094 | 41% |
| Transport And Highways | 4,050 | 306 | 8% |
| Housing | 4,021 | 1,407 | 35% |
| Planning | 3,380 | 395 | 12% |
| Children S Care Services | 3,280 | 792 | 24% |
| Environment And Regulation | 3,201 | 592 | 18% |
| Benefits And Tax | 2,378 | 405 | 17% |
| Other Categories | 1,968 | 118 | 6% |
| Health | 458 | 163 | 36% |
Organisation Accountability
Top 20 organisations by upheld rate (minimum 5 investigated decisions). Based on 11,687 investigated decisions (excludes 21,826 closed after initial enquiries). Benchmark: 81% average across all investigated decisions. Sparklines show annual decision volumes 2022–2026.
| # | Organisation | Trend | Investigated | Upheld | Not Upheld | Upheld Rate | vs avg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Care UK Community Partnerships Limited | 10 | 10 | 0 | 100% | +19pp | |
| 2 | Three Rivers District Council | 9 | 9 | 0 | 100% | +19pp | |
| 3 | Broxbourne Borough Council | 7 | 7 | 0 | 100% | +19pp | |
| 4 | St Albans City Council | 7 | 7 | 0 | 100% | +19pp | |
| 5 | Burnley Borough Council | 6 | 6 | 0 | 100% | +19pp | |
| 6 | Runnymede Borough Council | 6 | 6 | 0 | 100% | +19pp | |
| 7 | Adur District Council | 5 | 5 | 0 | 100% | +19pp | |
| 8 | Rutland County Council | 5 | 5 | 0 | 100% | +19pp | |
| 9 | Vale Of White Horse District Council | 5 | 5 | 0 | 100% | +19pp | |
| 10 | Swindon Borough Council | 23 | 22 | 1 | 96% | +15pp | |
| 11 | Somerset Council | 129 | 122 | 7 | 95% | +14pp | |
| 12 | North East Lincolnshire Council | 21 | 20 | 1 | 95% | +14pp | |
| 13 | Essex County Council | 421 | 392 | 29 | 93% | +12pp | |
| 14 | Derbyshire County Council | 136 | 126 | 10 | 93% | +12pp | |
| 15 | Blackpool Borough Council | 14 | 13 | 1 | 93% | +12pp | |
| 16 | London Borough of Lambeth | 153 | 140 | 13 | 92% | +11pp | |
| 17 | London Borough of Barking & Dagenham | 59 | 54 | 5 | 92% | +11pp | |
| 18 | Warrington Council | 13 | 12 | 1 | 92% | +11pp | |
| 19 | Eastbourne Borough Council | 12 | 11 | 1 | 92% | +11pp | |
| 20 | London Borough of Southwark | 139 | 126 | 13 | 91% | +10pp | |
| All-organisation benchmark | 81% | — | |||||