LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Ms X complained how the Council dealt with her daughter’s direct payments account. She says the Council told her there was a nil charge for services, and then three years later it wrote to her asking for over £5,000 for backdated arrears. We find the Council was at fault for its delay in completing audits and contacting Ms X about the outstanding arrears. This caused Ms X frustration and upset. The Council waived some of the outstanding arrears and arranged a payment plan when it responded to Ms X’s complaint. This partially remedies her injustice. The Council has also agreed to apolo

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about enforcement action regarding an unpaid parking penalty charge notice as it is reasonable to expect the complainant to ask the court at the Traffic Enforcement Centre to consider her case.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled his safeguarding concerns about his children. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Summary: Ms X alleges the Council failed to provide or secure suitable education for Y after exclusion, did not deliver EHCP provision, and communicated poorly. We did not find fault in the Council’s substantive education/EHCP duties. However, we found fault for matters concerning record-keeping and delay which caused avoidable uncertainty and a deferred right of appeal. The Council has agreed to our recommendations.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his information request. The Information Commissioner is better placed to deal with the matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled Mr X’s concerns about the welfare of his children. The complaint is mostly about matters we already considered and decided in 2023. We could not achieve a meaningful outcome in relation to the matter Mr X says is new and separable.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse her son’s application for a blue badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about data protection matters and the Council’s handling of a complaint. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to deal with the substantive matter and it would be disproportionate for us to investigate the Council’s complaint-handling.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a complaint against an elected councillor. This is because the complaint is late without good enough reason to investigate it now.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about tree root damage as it is reasonable to expect the complainant to resort to court action for the compensation she seeks.

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s actions in relation to her child, Z. We found fault because the Council failed to consider her complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. This caused Ms X avoidable distress and frustration. To remedy the injustice caused, the Council will now consider Ms X’s concerns through the statutory procedure and apologise for failing to do this originally. It will make a payment to her and issue guidance to staff.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council social worker told a family member that he had provided information to the Council about the family member’s personal circumstances without their consent. This is because the Council has already apologised to Mr X and arranged training for the staff member involved. We consider this to be a sufficient remedy to this complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discontinue taxi travel to school for Mrs X’s child. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to consider Miss X’s reasonable adjustments before recovering her council tax debt. This is because the Council has already put things right with its complaint response. An investigation would be unlikely to provide a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Mr X’s complaint in 2021/22. This is because the events complained about took place more than 12 months ago and it would have been reasonable for Mr X to bring this complaint to us at the time.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s complaints handling or a data breach by an officer because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about trees which the complainant says have damaged her property. This is because it is a matter for insurers and because part of the complaint is late.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s school admissions appeal panel refusing her appeal. It is unlikely we would find fault which caused Miss X to lose out on a school place.

Summary: We uphold this complaint that the Council used another process rather than the statutory procedure for complaints about children’s services to respond to Mrs X’s complaint. The Council has agreed to resolve the matter by providing a suitable remedy for the injustice caused to Mrs X.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to charge him for a replacement bin because the claimed injustice is not significant enough. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaints about staff conduct, the Council’s complaints process, or the Council’s implementation of his request for reasonable adjustments because there is insufficient evidence of fault for most of these matters, and an investigation is unlikely to achieve a different outcome for the remainder.

Summary: Mr B complained about the communications the Council had with him, around the time his wife (Mrs B) moved from their home into residential care. We did not uphold the complaint, finding no fault in the Council’s actions causing injustice to Mr B.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s responses to Ms X’s safeguarding concerns about the care home provision and future care arrangements for her relative, Mrs Y. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is no indication of fault by the Council. And, as Mrs Y’s future care needs will be decided in the Court of Protection, we will not investigate. It is reasonable for Ms X to make her views known to the Court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a member conduct complaint as it is reasonable to expect Mr X to ask the Council to review its decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a disabled parking bay. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council failed to collect refuse regularly since November 2023 due to an ongoing dispute with the refuse workers. Ms X says that due to her disabilities this has led to a build-up of uncollected rubbish which has affected her mental health. We have found no fault in the Council’s actions.