LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that Miss X does not qualify for the housing register. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to justify an investigation. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council not properly considering her first review request as the Council offered a proportionate remedy.

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

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council refused to communicate with him by phone. There is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Dr Y’s complaint about the Council’s decision to approve planning permission for her neighbour’s extension. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making to justify our involvement.

Summary: Ms X complained about delays and poor-quality workmanship of a wet room she had installed under a Disabled Facilities Grant. The Council was at fault. Its contractor took too long installing the wet room and poor quality of works has led to ongoing problems and snags. The Council agreed to make a payment to Ms X to acknowledge the distress and inconvenience caused. It has also agreed to commission an independent survey of the wet room to identify and resolve any ongoing issues caused by the initial contractor’s works.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about changes to a planning permission. This part of the complaint is late and we have seen no reason why Mr X could not have complained to us much sooner. Also, we will not investigate his concerns about freedom of information as he has already raised this matter with the Information Commissioner’s Officer. We consider this is the appropriate body to consider this part of the complaint.

Summary: There was fault by the Council as it missed about 15 assisted bin collections and/or returns in six months. An apology, payment and agreement to monitor collections for the next month remedies the injustice caused to Mr X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the conduct of a local election. The actions of the Returning Officer are outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in determining his planning application. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission without conditions on highways and drainage, causing access issues and increasing flood risk. We find no fault in the Council’s decision making process.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application and associated enforcement matters relating to a site next to the complainant’s home. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council directly causing the complainant a significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council’s household waste bin size allocation policy penalises his family by giving them less bin space than other families. There is not enough evidence of Council fault, nor of a significant injustice caused to Mr X’s family, to warrant us investigating.

Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s response to her complaints of noise nuisance from a games area near her home. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.