LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: The Council failed to keep adequate oversight of child Y’s part time educational arrangement between September 2024 and April 2025 or consider whether to put alternative provision in place. It also failed to ensure Y received the specialist provision in their Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan between February and April 2025. I could not investigate Y’s loss of specialist provision between September 2024 and February 2025 as Miss X had appealed Y’s EHC Plan to the SEND tribunal. The Council agreed to make a payment to acknowledge the impact the fault had on Y’s education.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage caused by a Council tree. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to take court action.

Summary: We found there was delay in arranging an Occupational Therapy assessment for Miss X. We found no evidence of prejudice or discrimination in the way the assessment was carried out. We recommended the Council apologised for the delay and made a modest payment to recognise the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council failing to maintain a road where he lives. It is reasonable for Mr X to apply to court for an order requiring the Council to repair the road.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council carried out building control inspections. This is because we do not start an investigation where there is not enough evidence of fault or when an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has failed to ensure the provision in her son’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan was implemented and fulfilled since April 2023. Mrs X also complained the Council failed to adhere to the statutory timeframes in the annual review process. We found the Council's delays in the annual review process and in issuing final EHC Plans is fault. As is the failure to ensure Y received all of the provisions in his EHC Plan since February 2024. These faults have caused Mrs X and her son frustration, distress and uncertainty. The Council will apologise and make sym

exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to take sufficient action over neighbour nuisance by its tenants for over two years. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner. We cannot investigate complaints about the management of tenancies by social housing landlords.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council ended direct payments for his daughters’ care and support without following the correct process. This is because the issues could reasonably be or have been mentioned as part of legal proceedings on a closely related matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint because the Council accepted it was at fault when it responded to Mrs D’s complaint about her father’s care charges. It provided a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mrs D and her father. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint, that the Council failed to ensure two children received consistent and suitable tuition. This is because we do not consider there is any evidence of significant fault by the Council, and we are satisfied the Council has proposed an appropriate way to address the provision that was missed.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council threatening him with legal action after serving him with notices issued to him as a private landlord. It was reasonable to expect Mr X to use his legal rights to appeal to the First Tier (Property Chamber) Tribunal against the notices.

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss B’s complaint about the Council’s handling of building work at one of its properties. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about the management of social housing by a council as a social landlord.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a safeguarding referral investigation in July 2023 as there are no good reasons the late complaint rule should not apply.

Summary: Mrs X complained about Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment delays and a failure to put alternative provision in place for her child Y when they stopped attending school at the end of 2023. The Council delayed issuing Y’s final EHC Plan by one month. It also failed to carry out oversight of Y’s alternative provision arrangements which meant Y went without education between January and April 2024. The Council agreed to make payments to recognise the injustice caused and carry out a service improvement. I have not considered Y’s education after April 2024 as Mrs X has appea

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about his property’s council tax band. This is because we cannot investigate the actions of the Valuation Office Agency.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about council tax liability and related issues. This is because she had the right to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal, and it is reasonable to expect her to have used it.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to offer support with his homelessness since 2021. We found the Council to be at fault because it failed to carry out enquiries about his homelessness in 2024. This caused Mr X frustration, time and trouble. In response to his complaint, the Council apologised, made a payment to Mr X and made service improvements. This is an appropriate remedy, and we do not recommend anything further. We did not investigate what happened between 2021 and 2023 because this part of Mr X’s complaint was late.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her late mother Mrs Y’s respite stay in a care home part-funded by the Council. An investigation would not lead to a different outcome nor achieve a worthwhile outcome and we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X seeks from her complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to end its homelessness for a homelessness application. It was reasonable for Mr X to exercise his right to appeal against the Council’s decision following its review of the case.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about standards committees because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about advice given to a Planning Committee about national rail works. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council, and our involvement could not achieve a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an insurance claim after Miss Y’s vehicle was damaged because the courts are better placed to consider the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaints about the suitability of her temporary accommodation and about the delay in providing her with long term accommodation. This is because Miss X has a right of appeal and because we are not likely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about residential care commissioned by the Council and provided to her late mother Mrs Y. There would be no worthwhile outcome investigation of the complaint would achieve for Mrs Y. An investigation by us would not add to the care firm’s investigation nor achieve a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. This is because we could not achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X.