Great Yarmouth Borough Council (19 012 493)

Statement Not upheld Commercial and contracts 06-Mar-2020

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council dealt with his tenancy of a retail business. He said it delayed issuing a lease and made his business unviable. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, we cannot achieve the outcome he wants, and he had an alternative, available legal remedy.

North Devon District Council (19 013 020)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Councillor conduct and standards 06-Mar-2020

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision not to investigate a complaint that a councillor breached the code of conduct and carried out criminal actions. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint about the breach of the code as we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions. Allegations of crimes are for the police.

Gloucestershire County Council (19 016 488)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 06-Mar-2020

Summary: A man complained that the Council had unfairly blocked him from posting comments on its social media platform. But the Ombudsman does not have grounds to investigate this matter. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

Birmingham City Council (19 008 456)

Statement Not upheld Leisure and culture 05-Mar-2020

Summary: Mr Y complained about the Council’s inadequate response to an outbreak of a disease amongst wild birds at one of the Council’s parks. He is also unhappy with the time taken for the Council to respond to his complaint. We have not found the Council at fault.

Manchester City Council (19 016 984)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 05-Mar-2020

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council wasting money in prosecuting her for fraud when it has neglected spending on homelessness in the area. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of any injustice to Ms X caused by the Council’s budgetary decisions.

Ribble Valley Borough Council (19 017 382)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Land 05-Mar-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning permission from a nearby property. A neighbour sought permission to develop on part of an access road serving their property, and Ms X’s. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons for the Ombudsman to investigate it now. The ownership of the access land was not a material planning matter for the Council and is a private civil matter. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in the way it dealt with the planning applications to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

Cheshire East Council (19 020 336)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Councillor conduct and standards 05-Mar-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with a complaint about his conduct. Mr X does not complain as a member of the public but as a member of the Council and so the complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s legal remit.

London Borough of Lewisham (19 007 496)

Statement Not upheld Other 04-Mar-2020

Summary: Mr C complained about the Council’s treatment of him under its ‘managing unreasonable complainant behaviour’ policy. Mr C said he suffered unnecessary upset and anxiety which had a harmful effect on an existing medical condition and the restriction added delay to any routine service request. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault by the Council.

Devon & Somerset Fire & Rescue Service (19 019 390)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 04-Mar-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the way the Fire and Rescue Service (F&RS) has managed its resources. This is because Mrs B is complaining in her capacity as a parish councillor.

Essex County Council (19 007 099)

Statement Upheld Other 03-Mar-2020

Summary: Mr X complains about how the Council managed his contact with it. He says the decision to restrict his contact affected his ability to raise issues in an emergency. The Ombudsman does find fault with how the Council managed Mr X’s contact however, this did not cause Mr X significant injustice.