Licensing archive 2020-2021


Archive has 61 results

  • Durham County Council (19 020 138)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 25-Jun-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Ms D’s complaint that her application for a marina berth has been refused. The decision was made by a community interest company (CIC) that manages the marina and the Council is not responsible for the issue being raised.

  • Durham County Council (19 020 668)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 25-Jun-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr B’s complaints about the management of a marina, value for money for council taxpayers and the decision not to renew his moorings licence. The decisions Mr B complains about were made by a community interest company (CIC) that manages the marina and the Council is not responsible for the issues being raised.

  • Kingston Upon Hull City Council (19 005 684)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 16-Jun-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council acted in a biased way towards a training provider and it was not transparent in its response to his communications and his complaint. We upheld the complaint. Mr X also complained the Council failed to consider concerns raised about the conduct and standards at the training provider. We found the Council should have considered the concerns raised and it had failed to do so. The Council has now taken action by amending its taxi driver application pack. The Council should also apologise, pay the Association £250 and consider the concerns raised about standards.

  • City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (19 021 174)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 08-Jun-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about being overcharged during a journey in a private hire vehicle. This is because the injustice to Ms X is not significant enough and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more.

  • London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (19 016 684)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 26-May-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman does not have reason to investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with a landlord’s applications for new property licences. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council which had caused the landlord a significant injustice regarding this matter.

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (19 017 926)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 21-May-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council charging a late selective registration tariff on his grandmother’s rental property which he manages on her behalf. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

  • Essex County Council (19 020 499)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 15-Apr-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the charge for a licence to carry out massages. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

  • Stoke-on-Trent City Council (19 020 841)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 14-Apr-2020

    Summary: Mr B complains about the Council’s unfair treatment of Mr X and its handling of his complaint about this matter. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because Mr B has not been caused injustice sufficient to warrant an investigation.

  • Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council (19 020 683)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 14-Apr-2020

    Summary: Mr B complains about the actions of Council officers in connection with a fine he incurred for failing to license an HMO. The Ombudsman cannot investigate the complaint because Mr B appealed to a statutory tribunal.

  • Slough Borough Council (19 018 424)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 07-Apr-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about loss of earnings and damages due to the Council rejecting her application for a dog boarding license. Ms X did not complain to us within the normal 12-month period, for part of her complaint, and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to accept the complaint now. Ms X had an appeal right to a tribunal. It is also reasonable for her to seek compensation through the courts.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings