LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council refusing to paint a H-bar marking on the road outside his home. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s council tax enquiries. This is because we could not add to the Council’s previous response and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome

Summary: Mr D complained about the Council’s handling of his council tax account and council tax support (CTS). There was fault by the Council. It delayed reinstating Mr D’s CTS and delayed telling him he needed to make a new claim. Because of the fault, Mr D suffered distress, and it meant he continued to chase the Council about the matter. The Council has agreed to make a symbolic payment, award Mr D any outstanding backdated CTS owed to him, and issue a staff briefing.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s homelessness application and its review. Ms X has used her right of appeal to the County Court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about enforcement action for council tax arrears. This is because the Council has resolved the complaint and the complainant is satisfied with the outcome.

Summary: Ms D complained the Council delayed dealing with her homelessness application. I have found evidence of fault by the Council. The Council has already made service improvements and has agreed to our recommendations to pay Ms D redress for the delay.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled Mx Z’s complaints about noise nuisance. This is because the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to meet its legal duty to ensure, as far as practicable, its land was free from rats and mice. We found the Council at fault. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and take further action.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about early refuse collections. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly pursued enforcement action for unpaid council tax after it had closed his account. We found the Council was at fault for failing to withdraw court costs when it closed the account, which led to avoidable enforcement action. This caused Mr X and his wife avoidable distress and time and trouble, and the Council has agreed to our remedy proposal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement case regarding a ‘house in multiple occupation’ which does not have planning permission. This is because:

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council issuing her a Fixed Penalty Notice for alleged fly tipping. This is because Mrs X had the opportunity to raise a defence against the issuing of the notice in court rather than paying it.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Fixed Penalty Notice he received for an alleged fly-tipping offence. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and Mr X has the choice of raising his defence in court.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling and administration relating to a House in Multiple Occupation owned by the Complainant. This is because she has used her appeal rights to a Tribunal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s request to move home due to his fears about his safety and about its failure to take enforcement action in relation to a disabled parking bay he uses. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not cutting hedges and grass in line with its maintenance schedule. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The Council has upheld the complaint and further investigation by us would not be proportionate.

Summary: There was no fault in how the Council decided on the purchase price or process for buying a property on the open market to meet the needs of Miss X and her family.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to provide Mr X with an outside garden tap. This is because we have no remit to consider complaints about the management of social housing.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to remove historic restrictive covenants affecting the complainant’s property. We cannot require the Council to speed up this matter and therefore cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a delay in concluding an investigation into breaches of health and safety legislation at a gym. We consider that further investigation by us now will not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to provide him with a replacement bin. We found the Council was at fault for the lengthy delay in providing him with a replacement bin. We also found the Council at fault for failing to manage Mr X’s case proactively. This caused him inconvenience, uncertainty, frustration and put him to the time and trouble of complaining. The Council has now apologised and provided Mr X with a replacement bin. The Council agreed to our further recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking permit scheme because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. In addition, the Council provided a satisfactory response regarding the complaint handling.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with a complaint about the conduct of a councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: Mr X complains about how the Council has dealt with fly tipping incidents near to his home and how the Council has dealt with his complaint. The Council was at fault for its complaint handling which caused injustice to Mr X. The Council has been asked to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to install advisory ‘keep clear’ markings on the road outside 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. The Council has confirmed it has no power to install advisory road markings.