LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of confidential personal information. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to decide this complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Mrs X’s housing application after she notified it of a change of circumstances. There is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice to justify an investigation.

Summary: We have upheld Mr Z’s complaint about the Council’s delay responding to his complaint. This is because the Council has agreed to provide a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss D’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her council tax liability. This is because Miss D put in an appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application and a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault and the complainant has not suffered significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement with Miss X’s family. Part of the complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to exercise discretion to consider it now.

Summary: Ms F complained on behalf of her late mother about the care provided in the Council commissioned care home, Franklin House Care Home. We found some fault which caused distress to Ms F. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to remedy this injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a letter Ms X received from the Council. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council providing insufficient support to Ms X and its communication with her daughter. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by us investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about burial arrangements for Mr X's brother. We are satisfied with the actions the Council has already proposed in response to his complaint, and we cannot achieve the outcome that Mr X wants.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council used an unfair selection process when choosing an organisation to run a community centre. That is because Mr X has not been caused an injustice by the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council completed an unannounced social care visit. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about tree maintenance. This is because the complaint is late.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council arranged access for Mr B to remove his personal belongings from his former home when his tenancy ended. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the bed in his care home and having access to his mobile phone. We cannot add to the previous investigation by the Council. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to have regard to the Equality Act in relation to debt recovery. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to issue Miss X with a Blue Badge because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to properly investigate and enforce breaches of planning control he reported on a site near his home, which he said affected his privacy and caused issues with drainage. The Council took too long to decide there was no breach of planning control and did not properly explain its decision making to Mr X. This caused avoidable distress for Mr X, and for others who lived near the site and raised enforcement concerns across the same period. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X and others, and pay a financial remedy to Mr X. It will also issue reminders

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action against private landowners, or carry out works to prevent further damage to her property. Mrs X has an alternative legal remedy, and it would be reasonable to expect her to use this. Additionally, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in its decision not to act.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to correct inaccurate personal data. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to prosecute Mr X’s landlord. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

The Council identified failings in some areas of care provided to Ms X. It also acknowledged a delay in dealing with Ms X’s complaint about this, but it failed to offer an adequate remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to install additional space parking opposite his house because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome he wants. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s removal of several disabled car parking spaces from a local car park because the issue does not cause Mr X significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s complaint. This is because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met and there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to the complainant’s request for help regarding a private tenant. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr X said the Council did not properly consider the impact of development on his home before granting planning permission. We found no fault in how the Council reached its planning decision. However, there was avoidable delay in the Council’s response to Mr X’s noise reports and its complaints handling. In addition to the apologies already given, the Council agreed to make a symbolic payment of £400 to Mr X in recognition of the frustration and avoidable time and trouble he was caused by its delays.