Trading standards archive 2017-2018


Archive has 22 results

  • Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council (17 018 691)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trading standards 27-Mar-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X's complaint about a decision by the Council's Trading Standards team not to take action against a firm which supplied goods to Mr X. This is because it is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault in the way the Council reached its decision and so we cannot question its merits.

  • Staffordshire County Council (17 016 939)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trading standards 26-Feb-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to investigate this complaint about the Council prosecuting the complainant over a Trading Standards matter.

  • Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (17 016 738)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trading standards 14-Feb-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr X's complaint about his prosecution by the Council for alleged trademark offences. The complaint concerns the conduct of court proceedings and this issue falls outside our jurisdiction.

  • Cheshire East Council (17 012 972)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trading standards 29-Jan-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about a visit by Trading Standards officers to the complainant's business premises. The visit was part of criminal proceedings before a court of law. The complainant can seek a remedy in court if he considers the Council is responsible for damage to his property.

  • Cornwall Council (17 014 507)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trading standards 18-Jan-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council's failure to properly investigate a trading standards matter. This because the complaint is too late.

  • Salford City Council (16 019 434)

    Statement Upheld Trading standards 17-Jan-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman found some fault by the Council on Mr D's complaint that it failed to take appropriate enforcement action and protect the public from a local electronics repair firm after receiving reports about poor service. While the Council received and considered hundreds of reports about this firm, the evidence does not show what happened with its investigation during a period of 12 months from April 2016. The delay caused no significant injustice to Mr D.

  • Worcestershire County Council (17 013 217)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trading standards 16-Jan-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr A's complaint that Trading Standards will not assist him in acting against a trader. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons for the Ombudsman to exercise his discretion and now investigate.

  • Oxfordshire County Council (17 013 934)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trading standards 22-Dec-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about copyright infringements between 1994 and 2003. The complaint is made too late and investigation would not achieve any worthwhile outcome.

  • Cambridgeshire County Council (17 012 456)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trading standards 04-Dec-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the way the Council's trading standards team has responded to his concerns about a garage. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault causing injustice to Mr X.

  • Northamptonshire County Council (17 011 362)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trading standards 01-Dec-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complain about a decision by the Council in 2014 not to prosecute over an alleged fraud. The complaint is made too late and, in any case, it is unlikely we would find evidence of fault by the Council. Further, given the level of compensation sought by the complainant, it would be reasonable for him to seek a remedy in court.