Decision search


What's this ?
  • Organisation
  • Decision type

  • Reference number
  • Date range

     

  • Sort Results

Show advanced search

Your search has 53740 results

  • Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (25 004 674)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Antisocial behaviour 04-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate the Council’s handling of Miss X’s complaints about suffering noise from a dog barking and anti-social behaviour. This is because the complaint is late - about what happened from 2020 to 2023 - and there are no good reasons for us to investigate now.

  • City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (25 004 960)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled facilities grants 04-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mrs X’s disagreement with the Council over adaptations to her home under the Disabled Facilities Grant scheme. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

  • Cannock Chase District Council (24 020 188)

    Statement Upheld Other 04-Sep-2025

    Summary: X complained about the Council’s decision relating to development on land next to a woodland protected by a Tree Preservation Order. We found fault in the way the Council made its decision. The Council will apologise for the injustice caused to X and for it to review its practices and procedures to avoid the same fault happening again.

  • Lancashire County Council (24 021 786)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 04-Sep-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to complete the annual review of his child’s Education, Health and Care Plan and failed to suitably communicate with him. We found fault with the Council failing to complete the annual review process of Mr X’s child’s EHC Plan for 28 months outside the statutory timescales. We also found fault with the Council’s handling of Mr X’s complaint. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X, pay him £500 for the avoidable inconvenience and frustration he experienced and £1,750 for his child’s uncertainty and potential lost opportunity caused by the Council’s fault.

  • North Warwickshire Borough Council (25 000 714)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Councillor conduct and standards 04-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a councillor conduct complaint as the process has now been finalised and the complainant has indicated he is satisfied with the outcome.

  • London Borough of Haringey (25 005 227)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 04-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because the complaint is late without good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating now.

  • Reading Borough Council (25 005 869)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 04-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of, and response to, his subject access request. This is because this is a complaint about matters best considered and decided by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

  • Staffordshire County Council (25 006 355)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 04-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s actions in its child protection involvement with her family. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to investigate her complaint whilst there are ongoing related court proceedings.

  • Thurrock Council (25 006 483)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 04-Sep-2025

    Summary: We cannot investigate a complaint about Mr X’s liability for business rates. This is because only a court can decide liability for business rates.

  • Warrington Council (25 006 575)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 04-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will investigate Miss X’s complaint about matters related to the Council’s data handling. This is because it is reasonable to expect her to take the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office.

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