LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council handled her right to buy her home. This is because Miss X could reasonably have used her right to go to Court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the action of the Council’s children’s services regarding his child before summer 2024 because the complaints are late. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a safeguarding referral the Council received in summer 2024 because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: Mrs B complained the Council failed to adhere to statutory timeframes for issuing an Education, Health and Care Plan for her child, X. We find the Council at fault for delays in completing the annual review and failing to consider its duty to provide the special educational provision set out in the Plan. These faults have caused distress, frustration and uncertainty for the family and impacted X’s access to education. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment and complete service improvements to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We upheld a complaint from Mr B about the Council’s response to concerns he had about the incomplete housing development he lives on. We found the Council’s planning enforcement service communicated poorly with Mr B, including after he complained, and it lacked a clear plan to tackle the issues he raised. These faults caused Mr B unnecessary uncertainty, time and trouble. The Council accepted these findings and at the end of this statement, we set out the action it agreed to take to remedy this injustice and improve its service.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to act on planning breaches and environmental health issues and delayed responding to his complaint. The Council delayed investigating the planning issues and delayed responding to the complaint which caused Mr X frustration. There is no fault in how the Council assessed the planning breaches or in how it considered the environmental health issues. An apology for Mr X’s frustration is satisfactory remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has refused to engage with complainant about finding a viable use for a listed building he owns. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council has responded to the request for engagement, and we cannot investigate alleged faults which affect all or most people in the Council’s area.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council tax premium because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in updating Mr X’s council tax account. This is because the Council has already remedied any injustice Mr X suffered due to this matter.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. This is because Mr X has complained as a parish councillor and the injustice he claims is to the parish council rather than to him as a member of the public. The law says we cannot investigate complaints from public bodies such as parish councils.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with Ms X’s housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council leaving a walkway in an unsafe state. This is because it is unlikely an investigation would add to the Council’s own investigation and it is reasonable for Mrs B to take the Council to court if she seeks compensation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the school named in an education, health and care plan and the loss of educational provision because it was reasonable for the complainant to have used his right of appeal to a tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about fault on the Council’s part in the process of assessing the complainant’s son’s needs and issuing an Education Health and Care plan. This is because the complaint has already been upheld and investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that her car was damaged by a pothole which the Council had failed to repair. This is because it is reasonable for Miss B to pursue her compensation claim by taking the Council to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because the complainant has not suffered significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Miss X’s request relating to a community centre. This is because it is a late complaint and we will not exercise discretion to consider it because Miss X has not provided any good reasons why it could not have been brought to us sooner.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a planning enforcement matter because it has been made by a parish council. We cannot investigate complaints made by public bodies such as parish councils.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s responses to her homelessness applications and her local welfare fund application. Miss X had a right of review which it was reasonable for her to use, and there is otherwise not enough evidence of fault causing injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council refusing free school transport for her child. This is mainly because there is not enough evidence of fault undermining the Council’s decision.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged by loose road chippings. 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 response to a report of a blocked public right of away, and the subsequent complaint. An investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome, it is reasonable to expect the complainant to use the alternative court remedy, and the injustice caused by the alleged fault is not significant enough to warrant our continued involvement in the matter.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s liability for damage to her driveway. This is because Mrs X has a legal remedy to pursue the matter through the courts, and it would be reasonable for her to do so

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay in the sale of a Council property under the Right to Buy scheme. This is because the Council is to consider the complaint further.

Summary: Miss B complained the Council failed to follow the statutory process for issuing an Education, Health and Care Plan for her son. We find the Council at fault for a delay in issuing the final Education, Health and Care Plan. This caused Miss B distress, frustration and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment to Miss B and complete service improvements to remedy the injustice caused.

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