LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the District Council’s handling of code of conduct complaints the complainant made about four town councillors. There is insufficient evidence that any fault has affected the outcome on the code of conduct complaints, and an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to achieve any worthwhile outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council responded to Mr X’s Anti-Social Behaviour complaints. This is because

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with a complaint about a Town Council. This is because we have no jurisdiction to investigate the actions of town councils so cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a decision to grant planning permission. Planning permission was granted more than five years ago. The complaint about this is late and we have seen no reason to exercise discretion on this point. Mr X also complains about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action against breaches of planning control. We have not seen sufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council made this decision to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about changes to the Right to Buy scheme. We cannot investigate complaints about the Council’s management of social housing.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with works to an access road on its land which serves his partner Ms X’s property, it not replying to some correspondence, and a data protection issue. Ms X may appeal to a tribunal regarding the Council’s process and its outcome which it would be reasonable for her to use. There is insufficient personal injustice to Ms or Mr X to warrant investigating. We do not investigate council correspondence where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint. There are no good reasons for us to investig

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council inviting the police to attend a Council meeting. We do not the complainant has suffered sufficient personal injustice to warrant our involvement. And we cannot achieve one of the outcomes he is seeking.

Summary: Mr X complained that between March 2023 and February 2024 the Council mismanaged its waste collection service resulting in many missed bin collections from his property. The Council accepts its service fell below expected standards during this period but has now provided additional resources and the service is operating as expected. A suitable remedy is agreed.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a complaint about the conduct of a councillor. This is because the complainant has not suffered significant injustice.

Summary: Mrs X and Mr Z complain that the Council has failed to take appropriate enforcement action against a neighbour for planning breaches, or delayed action when it said it would. We did not find fault with how the Council came to its decision not to take further action for one breach. We found fault with delays in its investigations. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the conduct of a Council Officer and lack of support from the Council. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. We cannot investigate complaints made by public bodies such as parish councils.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application and a complaint about the conduct of a councillor. This is because the complainant has not suffered any significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of licensing standards at a kennel and cattery in Ms X’s area. This is because past events fall outside our jurisdiction due to the passage of time and there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Ms X to warrant an investigation into more recent events.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of planning and environmental health matters relating to noise nuisance reported by Mr X over a number of years. This is because the complaint is a late complaint and so falls outside our jurisdiction due to the passage of time.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration and approval of a proposal for a new conservation area put forward by a parish council. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the proposal. Nor can we achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

Summary: Mrs X and Dr Y complained the Council failed to properly consider planning applications at a neighbouring property. We will not investigate this complaint. The planning permission can no longer be executed, and we have decided to discontinue our investigation as further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to carry out a comparison of why planning permission was granted for a particular planning application when Mr and Mrs X’s own applications have been refused. This is because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council and the substantive issue falls outside our jurisdiction due to the availability of appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate.

Summary: Mrs X complained about noise from an electricity substation opposite her home. She said the Council accepts there is noise nuisance but cannot act. Mrs X complained the Council did not create a suitable planning condition to mitigate the noise, did not consult UK Power Network, and did not carry out noise assessments as part of the planning process. The Council was at fault for failing to properly discharge the planning condition about noise mitigation. This caused Mrs X prolonged injustice which the Council agreed to remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of the complainant’s planning application and his reports of breaches of planning control. The complainant has appealed the planning decision therefore this part of the complaint is outside our jurisdiction. The complaint about planning enforcement is made too late and there is no reason to investigate it now.

Summary: Mr B complained about the way the Council decided a planning application for development near his property. In particular he said the Council failed to properly consider the impact of the development on his amenity and failed to follow the Council’s planning guidance. We found the Council misrepresented Mr B’s property in the officer’s report which caused Mr B frustration and uncertainty. But we did not consider the fault affected the outcome of the planning application. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B and pay him £150.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of its finances. This is because the issue affects all or most of the people in the Council’s area.

Summary: We found fault with the way the Council handled Mr C’s temporary event notice and the advice it gave about his party. The Council agreed actions to remedy the injustice to Mr C.