LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Miss Y complains the Council delayed in reviewing and amending C’s Education Health and Care Plan which meant that C did not receive the education they needed after they stopped attending school. The Council has accepted that it delayed reviewing the plan and has refunded some of the tuition costs which Miss Y incurred during the period of delay. Following our recommendations, the Council has now agreed to make a further payment to fully remedy the injustice caused to C.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that he is not eligible to join its housing register. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: There was a two-and-a half month delay issuing Y’s final Education, Health and Care Plan, causing a delay in appeal rights. There was delay arranging alternative educational provision for her from April 2023. This caused a loss of alternative educational provision between April and September 2023. There was also a failure to consider Ms X’s request for tuition in January 2023 which caused avoidable uncertainty. The Council will make payments and apologise. It will also finalise and implement its policy about the duty in section 19 of the Education Act 1996.

Summary: We have found no fault with how the Council handled Miss X’s homelessness and housing register applications. The Council acted in line with relevant law and guidance.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions in supporting Mr X with making decisions about his accommodation. We cannot achieve the outcomes Mrs X seeks.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to reports of Anti-social behaviour, affecting Miss X. It is

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council is ignoring residents’ concerns about a new road layout. There is insufficient evidence of fault, and we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to provide appropriate signage on a road diversion. This is because any injustice Mr X experienced is not sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Mrs B complained the Council delayed completing an annual review and in issuing a final EHC Plan, failed to put in place provision in the EHC Plan, delayed providing her with a personal budget and gave her conflicting information about whether the Council would complete a full reassessment. The Council delayed completing the annual review and in issuing a final EHC Plan, the Council’s decision making and communications about the reassessment were not clear and the Council delayed paying the personal budget and in responding to a complaint. That caused Mrs B significant distress, denie

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to ensure her child, Y, had sufficient full-time education, put in place the provision outlined in Section F and failed to name a suitable placement. Mrs X also says the Council failed to carry out an annual review, act on or respond to her request for a personal budget and carry out agreed actions or respond to communications. Mrs X says this has caused her and her family distress and that Y has missed educational provision. We have found fault in the Councils actions for failing to complete the annual review process, ensure provision was in place i

Summary: Ms A complained about the care provided to her father, and the related costs, which she said were unnecessary. Based on current evidence we consider the Council is at fault for its communication with Ms A. I have recommended it apologise to Ms A. I did not find fault in relation to the care costs complained of.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council’s planning decision is based on inaccurate information and not in line with law or council policy. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not take effective action with complaints he made with alleged planning breaches against the business he lives above. We did not find fault with the Council’s general actions and decision there was no planning breach. We found fault with it failing to properly evidence its consideration of Mr X’s reports about anti-social behaviour, causing him frustration and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise and take action to prevent future recurrence.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage to Mr X’s car caused by a highway defect because the Council’s payment of the claim is a sufficient remedy and it is unlikely that further investigation would achieve significantly more for Mr X.

Summary: We upheld Mr X’s complaint about delays in the children’s statutory complaints process. The Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by apologising, paying Mr X £500, and completing stage 3 of the children’s statutory complaints process.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly removed him from its housing register when he refused an offer of accommodation in an area he did not select on his application. We find no fault in the way the Council made its decision.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s involvement with her children and contact arrangements. The law prevents us from investigating anything that has or is the subject of court proceedings. It would be reasonable for Miss X to raise any concerns she has with the court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council considered and decided his neighbour’s planning application. There is not enough evidence of Council fault to warrant an investigation and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks. Other complaints about the planning processes are premature and it is reasonable for him to raise them with the Council first.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his son’s Education, Health and Care plan and education in school between September 2022 and after September 2023 when he became of compulsory school age. We found the Council was at fault for the delay in deciding if A received all provision from section F of his Plan since April 2023. This caused Mr X distress and uncertainty. The Council agreed to apologise and pay Mr X a financial remedy.

Summary: Mrs B complained that the Council had failed to properly consider its statutory duty to provide transport to her son C without requiring her to accompany him. We agreed with the Council’s view that it did not consider the appeal properly and welcome its offer of £500 to Mrs B for her inconvenience. The Council has also agreed to apologise to her and provide guidance to appeal panels on the Council’s statutory duties.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s enforcement of a parking penalty charge notice as Mrs X had the right to ask the court to consider her case.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to secure the provision set out in her son, Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan, and failed to issue an amended plan within the correct timescale for a phase transfer. We found the Council was at fault for delays and failing to secure all provision in Y’s EHC Plan. This Council agreed to apologise and provide symbolic financial payments for the distress and uncertainty caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her request it issue her son with an Education, Health and Care Plan. Ms X appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability). This places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because the complainant appealed to the tribunal.

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