Decision search
Your search has 53740 results
-
London Borough of Haringey (25 007 086)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Housing benefit and council tax benefit 26-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a Discretionary Housing Payment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
-
Tunbridge Wells Borough Council (25 007 817)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 26-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a premium added to his Council tax because he could appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.
-
Birmingham City Council (25 008 051)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 26-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax banding because this is a matter for the Valuation Office Agency, a body out of jurisdiction. A dispute about liability is for the Valuation Tribunal.
-
Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (25 008 131)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Antisocial behaviour 26-Aug-2025
Summary: X complained about the way the Council investigated their complaint about their neighbour’s alleged anti-social behaviour in 2022. We will not investigate this complaint further, because the matters complained about occurred long before our 12-month time limit on investigations. There is no evidence that persuades us to use our discretion to go back beyond this limit.
-
London Borough of Sutton (25 009 783)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 26-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because the complainant could have appealed to the tribunal.
-
Bristol City Council (25 010 321)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 26-Aug-2025
Summary: We cannot investigate Mr C’s complaint that the Council has failed to repair structural defects at a property it owns. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about the management of social housing by a council acting as a social landlord.
-
North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (25 011 639)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 26-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Mr X’s concerns about the safety and wellbeing of one of his children. It is unlikely an investigation would find fault with the Council.
-
Derby City Council (24 006 025)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Aug-2025
Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide her child, Y, with the support outlined in their Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan and that Y’s school placement failed. We found there was fault causing injustice when the Council delayed investigating Y’s EHC Plan provision and delayed issuing Y’s amended EHC Plan following a review. The Council offered a suitable remedy for the injustice and will review the case to identify learning. The Council’s decision to name a school in Y’s EHC Plan came with a right of appeal and is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction, as is the education Y missed during the appeals process.
-
London Borough of Camden (24 009 936)
Statement Upheld Antisocial behaviour 25-Aug-2025
Summary: Mx Y complained about the Council’s response to reports of anti-social behaviour they made it aware of. We upheld the complaint, finding the Council communicated poorly with Mx Y and failed to ensure meetings it arranged focused on the behaviour Mx Y reported. These faults caused Mx Y an injustice, as avoidable distress. The Council has accepted these findings. At the end of this statement we set out action it has agreed to take to remedy Mx Y’s injustice and improve its service to avoid a repeat of the faults.
-
London Borough of Hounslow (24 013 763)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 25-Aug-2025
Summary: On behalf of Miss X, Ms D complained the Council failed to offer Miss X suitable interim accommodation after accepting she had a priority need. The Council said Miss X owed rent for the interim accommodation, but Ms D said Miss X had never accepted or stayed at the property. Ms D also said the Council failed to provide temporary accommodation for Ms D when it accepted the main housing duty and communicated poorly. We have not found the Council at fault for offering unsuitable interim accommodation. We have found the Council at fault for not terminating the interim accommodation sooner, and for failing to offer Miss X temporary accommodation when it accepted the main housing duty. We have also found the Council at fault for its record-keeping and communication. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and write-off some of the arrears Miss X accrued for the interim accommodation. The Council has also agreed to pay a symbolic financial remedy to recognise the avoidable uncertainty and frustration caused.