LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an unsuccessful school admission appeal. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault for us to be able to question the panel’s decision.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X complaint about whether the Council provided her child with a suitable education. It is reasonable for her to have appealed to the Tribunal.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council did not take appropriate action when she raised safeguarding concerns about her family member. We find no fault with the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint the Council did not respond to her complaints about Children’s Services. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault. We will also not investigate her complaint about a current child protection plan. That is because it first needs to complete the Council’s complaint procedure.

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 Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s housing decision. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled a complaint regarding adult social care assessment. We could not achieve a meaningful outcome as the substantive matter was resolved, and it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint-handling in isolation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care. The Council has completed a thorough investigation, accepted fault, apologised and will train staff in relevant areas. It is unlikely we would add to this or achieve anything further. We are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a council tax support decision as Mr X can appeal this to the Valuation Tribunal. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council did not send him forms as this complaint is made late. We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about what was said about him in court at a council tax hearing as this is not within our legal remit.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to fund travel costs to a day centre he chooses to attend outside of its area. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to suitably consider his application and appeal for home to school transport for his child. We did not find fault with the Council’s decision to refuse home to school transport for Mr X’s child. We did find fault with the Council failing to follow its process. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X for failing to follow its process. The Council also agreed to provide training to staff about following its process and including relevant information about how to appeal decisions.

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

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse her son Mr Y’s Blue Badge application and appeal, its consideration of his medical evidence, the basis of its decision-making, or the time the Council took to issue its decisions. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making processes to warrant us investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council failed to safeguard him from abuse. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to backdate his personal budget to 8 April, when he moved out of the family home. The Council failed to consider exercising its discretion to allow Mr X to employ his mother as his personal assistant when he was still living with her. But this did not cause injustice to Mr X as there were other option open to him. Nevertheless, the Council has plans to take action which will ensure officers are aware of the scope to exercise the Council’s discretion.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the amount the Council assessed him as having to contribute towards the cost of his care and support, about the Council passing his debt to an enforcement agent, and about cutting his care and support hours. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a breach of GDPR. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider it.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care financial assessment. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council completed the financial assessment. There is fault in delay completing an appeal of the financial assessment decision, and sending invoices for payment while the complaint was continuing. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a total payment of £250 to acknowledge the complainant’s distress, time and trouble. We are satisfied with the actions the Council has agreed to take and it is unlikely an investigation would achieve anything further

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to take action against her neighbours for driving over raised kerbs. This is because the issue does not cause Miss X significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about his belongings being stolen in 2019. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider it now.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to revoke his taxi driver’s licence. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the magistrates’ court. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to reinstate his licence because there is no provision for this. If Mr X wants to get a new licence he will have to apply to the Council and if it refuses his application he may appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the appeal to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X not having seen his daughter for 14 years and the Council having taken her into care without his consent. Only a court can decide disputed contact and residence arrangements for a child, so it would be reasonable for Mr X to use his right to go to court about recent matters. Historic matters are also late and there would be no good reason to exercise discretion to consider them even if they were not also matters that only a court could have resolved.