Archive has 61 results
-
Transport for London (19 009 902)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 10-Feb-2021
Summary: Mr X complains the Council will not give him a pro-rata refund for unused years on a private hire vehicle operator’s licence he took out with it. We will not investigate as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council. Mr X’s complaint about the Council suspending his licence prior to this is outside our legal remit. This is because Mr X had the right to appeal against the Council’s decision in court.
-
London Borough of Newham (20 010 927)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 09-Feb-2021
Summary: We will not investigate Ms A’s complaint about the Council’s licensing and planning processes as there is not enough evidence of fault causing her significant injustice so an investigation is not warranted.
-
London Borough of Southwark (19 019 659)
Statement Not upheld Licensing 09-Feb-2021
Summary: Mr B complained about the Council’s handling of his street trading licence applications. He also complained that the Council failed to respond to his complaint in accordance with its complaints procedure. We do not uphold Mr B’s complaint.
-
Statement Upheld Licensing 09-Feb-2021
Summary: There was fault by the Council in its handling of a park home site licence, because of a single potential licence breach which it did not properly follow up. This has caused an injustice to the complainants, which it has agreed to remedy. However, there is no evidence of fault in the other numerous issues raised by the complainants about site licensing. The Council was also at fault for wrongly telling the complainants it had not identified any breaches of the site licence, but this did not cause a significant injustice.
-
London Borough of Hackney (19 003 081)
Statement Upheld Licensing 05-Feb-2021
Summary: Mr X, a landlord, complains the Council’s selective licensing scheme terms were wrong. He said he was put to time and trouble, the Council delayed responding and did not alter its terms. We find the Council was at fault. It has agreed a remedy.
-
Bristol City Council (20 009 431)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 05-Feb-2021
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to refund an overpayment which he made for a taxi licence. We should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice which would warrant an investigation.
-
Epsom & Ewell Borough Council (20 005 515)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 27-Jan-2021
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council will not give the complainant a full refund on a licence fee for a House of Multiple Occupation. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and the complainant could complain to the Information Commissioner.
-
Cheshire East Council (20 009 220)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 25-Jan-2021
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to refund a fee for a taxi vehicle inspection. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
-
Warwick District Council (20 003 138)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 04-Jan-2021
Summary: Ms X complains the Council was wrong to interpret its policy on licensing street traders as covering her canal boat. We will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
-
Transport for London (20 007 670)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 15-Dec-2020
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Authority’s decision that the complainant failed a test for a taxi driver licence. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Authority and because we could not achieve the outcome the complainant wants. In addition, the complainant could complain to the Information Commissioner.