Environment and regulation archive 2020-2021


Archive has 145 results

  • 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.

  • Cambridge City Council (19 020 398)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 09-Feb-2021

    Summary: Ms D complains the Council failed to deal effectively with noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour from her downstairs neighbour. We have found no fault by the Council.

  • Dorset Council (20 001 204)

    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.

  • Birmingham City Council (20 004 441)

    Statement Upheld Refuse and recycling 09-Feb-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complains that although she should receive assisted collections, the Council routinely fails to collect her household waste and recycling when collecting her neighbours’ bins. The Council’s repeated failings in the assisted collection service it provided to Mrs X amount to fault. This fault has caused Mrs X an injustice.

  • 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 Redbridge (20 009 498)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Refuse and recycling 09-Feb-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about difficulties with the clinical waste service. This is because the Council has provided a fair response and there is insufficient evidence of injustice. In addition, part of the complaint is late.

  • London Borough of Harrow (20 010 075)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 09-Feb-2021

    Summary: Miss X complained about the Council serving her with a Building Act notice for a drainage misconnection which she denies liability for. We should not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint. This is because it was reasonable for her to appeal against the notice to the Magistrates’ Court if she believed it was inappropriate.

  • Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council (20 004 396)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 08-Feb-2021

    Summary: Miss X complains that the Council has failed to act on her reports of nuisance and anti-social behaviour from her neighbours. She also complains that the Council has unfairly restricted her contact with officers. Miss X says she feels mentally abused by the Council and her neighbours, distressed, and traumatised. The Ombudsman does not find the Council at fault.

  • Birmingham City Council (20 009 604)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Refuse and recycling 08-Feb-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a missed bin collection because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

  • Scarborough Borough Council (19 019 720)

    Statement Not upheld Pollution 05-Feb-2021

    Summary: Mr Y complains about the way the Council responded to his reports of asbestos in a local holiday cottage. In our view, and based on the information available, we find the Council acted quickly and in line with its enforcement policy and Health and Safety Executive guidance to assess the reported risk. It reached a conclusion which Mr Y disagreed with, but the Ombudsman has no grounds to challenge the merits of that decision.

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