LGO Individual Decisions

The Council failed to decide if it was “necessary” to provide appropriate free transport to enable Ms X’s adult daughter, Miss Y, to attend the college named in her Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. It confused matters for adult learners, like Miss Y, who began their course after the age of 19, with the education transport rules for sixth form students. The Council’s amended Transport Policy 2024/2025 was not in line with the Education Act 1996 or case law for 19–25 year old learners with an EHC Plan. The faults caused Ms X avoidable frustration, avoidable time and trouble and uncertainty

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about the content and preparation of documents used in court proceedings. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider a data protection act allegation. We will not investigate an allegation of lack of safeguarding support during court proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Anti-social behaviour.

Summary: We have found the Council at fault for failing to secure interim accommodation for Miss X when it had reason to believe that she was eligible, homeless and in priority need. This left Miss X without suitable accommodation for the period until the Council reached its decision that she had no priority need. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy Miss X’s injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Miss X’s complaint about how the Council recorded historical information, and how it dealt with her request for information. We could not add to the Council’s investigation and the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider the issue.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Council's planning decision. It is unlikely we could significantly add to the Council’s reply to Mr X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of Ms X and Ms Y’s care costs. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: Miss X complained about the way the Council dealt with her homelessness application. We found fault in the Council’s delays to assess Miss X’s housing needs and provide her with interim accommodation as well as in the Council’s communication with her and its record-keeping. The Council’s fault caused injustice to Miss X. The Council has agreed to apologise, make symbolic payments and backdate the change in Miss X’s priority banding. The Council has also agreed to improve the way it keeps its housing records.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the council failed to arrange a suitable school placement for her son. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mrs X to use her right of appeal to challenge the placement listed in her son’s Education Health and Care Plan.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about charging for adult care services. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council reached its final calculation of Miss X’s disability-related expenditure to warrant investigation by us.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council failed to maintain a ‘Fit and Proper Person’ register for park home sites. Any injustice s not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council handled her housing application and her having to move out of temporary accommodation while the landlord carried out repairs. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome Miss X is seeking.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide education for her child who has been absent from school since January 2024. We found fault with the Council failing to ensure Y had access to suitable education for time periods totalling two terms and one week from 21 February 2024 to 21 March 2025. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X and pay her £3,325 for Y’s missed education. The Council also agreed to remind staff about the importance of acting in line with government guidance over timescales for considering its Section 19 duty. And, the Council agreed to provide training to sta

Summary: Mrs P complained about problems with the Council in issuing and amending her young son’s (Child X) Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan), as well as its alleged failure to provide him speech and language therapy. Based on the available evidence, we found the Council delayed issuing an amended EHC Plan and failed to meet with Mrs P to discuss its proposed amendments. We also found the Council failed to secure the therapy provision identified in Child X’s EHC Plans. This caused an injustice to Child X, as well as Mrs P who paid for privately arranged therapy herself. The Council ha

Summary: Mrs B complained about how the Council handled her Landowner Statement relating to a piece of land and a later Town and Village Green application. There was fault by the Council. It did not follow the correct process which caused Mrs B uncertainty. It did not deal with her complaint to it in good time. The Council should apologise to Mrs B and write to her to confirm her Landowner Statement is valid.

Summary: Miss X complained about the way professionals assessed her under the Mental Health Act 1983 and their recommendation that she should be detained. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because it is unlikely an investigation would be able to find evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the outcome of the occupational therapy assessment affecting his application for a Disabled Facilities Grant. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to carry out an Education Health Care needs assessment or the contents of the Education Health and Care Plan. This is because Ms X has appealed to a tribunal.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to meet statutory requirements when amending her child’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. We have found the Council at fault for delays in completing Z’s annual review and issuing their amended final EHC Plan. We have found the Council at fault for failing to respond to mediation requests in line with the SEN Code of Practice, for its inconsistent responses to Mrs X’s request for a personal budget, and for its communication and complaint handling. These faults caused Mrs X and Z avoidable frustration, uncertainty and distress. The Council has

Summary: Ms F complained the Council failed to follow the correct process when dealing with her Code of Conduct complaint. I have found some fault by the Council which caused Ms F avoidable uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms F.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about missed waste collections. The Council is now regularly collecting his waste. An investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council dealt with her housing situation when her family became homeless. The Council found that it had taken too long to assess her situation and deal with a review, but it failed to remedy the impact of this when Miss X complained to it. The Council caused Miss X distress and uncertainty and this affected her particularly because the failings spanned a long time and the Council was aware of Miss X’s disabilities and mental illness. The Council will apologise to Miss X and make some symbolic payments to recognise the impact on her. It will also backdat

Summary: Ms D complained the Council failed to accept her applications to join the housing register since 2020. I have found fault by the Council. It implemented an undocumented policy to exclude tenants of a Housing Association from joining the housing register. This meant Ms D was incorrectly prevented from being eligible to join the housing register for over four years. The Council has agreed to pay Ms D redress for avoidable distress and change her effective date.