Other archive 2021-2022


Archive has 285 results

  • Hampshire Police and Crime Commissioner (21 014 596)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 18-Mar-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about lack of communication by the Police and Crime Commissioner about the Police and Crime Plan as this impacts on all or most of the people in the area and so is outside our legal remit. In addition, any remaining injustice caused to Mr X personally is not sufficient to warrant our involvement.

  • London Borough of Lambeth (21 018 277)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 17-Mar-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to respond to Miss X’s Subject Access Request. This is because Miss X has already complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office which is best placed to deal with her complaint.

  • Havant Borough Council (21 015 650)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 16-Mar-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council discriminates against the complainant by allowing car meets to take place in its car parks without a licence. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

  • Birmingham City Council (21 016 555)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 15-Mar-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing access to a toilet. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

  • Birmingham City Council (21 016 255)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 15-Mar-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with concerns raised about events that a local community group arranged. This is because the matters have not caused the complainant an injustice. We cannot investigate Mr X’s claims that a member of the community group made threats against the complainant because it is a matter for the police.

  • Cheshire West & Chester Council (21 013 266)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 15-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mr X complains he received a connection request on social media from a Council officer. We have discontinued our investigation. This is because the officer’s actions were not made in connection with the administrative functions of the Council and the matter is therefore out of our jurisdiction.

  • Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (21 017 977)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 11-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mr X says the Council has failed to answer his Freedom of Information request properly. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is reasonable for Mr X to complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office as the most appropriate authority for his complaint.

  • Surrey County Council (21 009 310)

    Statement Upheld Other 11-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council managed the Coroner’s inquest into her father’s death. The Council was at fault when it both failed to invite Mrs X to the inquest and provide her with important documents prior to it. It meant Mrs X did not attend the inquest into her father’s death and lost the opportunity to ask relevant witnesses questions. The Council agreed to pay Mrs X £300 to recognise the distress, frustration and uncertainty this caused.

  • Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (21 016 318)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 08-Mar-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council publicised a tendering opportunity. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council or the company acting on its behalf.

  • Lancaster City Council (20 006 664)

    Statement Upheld Other 08-Mar-2022

    Summary: The Council delayed reviewing Mr B’s designation as an unreasonably persistent complainant for two years. The result of the review was for the designation and restrictions to remain; therefore, its delay has not caused any significant injustice. The Council has apologised for the frustration caused by its delay, which is appropriate action in response.

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