Local Government Ombudsman Logo

www.lgo.org.uk has experienced a problem

The website has encountered an error. The issue has been logged so that we can investigate the cause.

You can visit the home page and try browsing again. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience caused.

You may still be able to use our online complaint service if you want to register a complaint or log into your account.

SearchResult - Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman

Decision search

What's this ?
  • Organisation
  • Decision type

  • Reference number
  • Date range

     

  • Sort Results

Show advanced search

Your search has 55054 results

  • London Borough of Newham (24 021 960)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 10-Nov-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint because we cannot achieve the outcome she wants. The SEND Tribunal has decided which school B will attend. Ms M disagrees, but we cannot consider these matters now. The Council has responded to Ms M’s concerns about the school and there is nothing we could add by further investigation. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision not to make alternative arrangements for B’s education to justify investigating.

  • Birmingham City Council (24 022 972)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 10-Nov-2025

    Summary: Mr C complained that the Council had failed to take action to stop the use of the neighbouring property as a short-term rental. We have not found fault.

  • West Sussex County Council (25 002 474)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 10-Nov-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about matters concerning her son’s education. This is because her complaint is made late and I see no good reason why it could not have been made sooner.

  • London Borough of Islington (25 002 588)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 10-Nov-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about housing allocations. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council determined his housing priority banding which would warrant an investigation.

  • Gedling Borough Council (25 004 715)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 10-Nov-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with planning applications for a site near her property, and how it responded to her complaint. There is not enough evidence of Council fault to warrant us investigating. There is insufficient significant personal injustice caused to Mrs X to justify an investigation. We also cannot achieve the key outcomes she seeks. We do not investigate councils’ complaint-handling where we are not investigating the issues which gave rise to the complaint.

  • Stroud District Council (25 006 466)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Refuse and recycling 10-Nov-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with wate and littering. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

  • Horsham District Council (25 006 804)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 10-Nov-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal of a wild animal licence as it is reasonable to expect Mr X to have appealed the decision to the Magistrates’ Court.

  • South Gloucestershire Council (24 010 920)

    Statement Upheld Alternative provision 10-Nov-2025

    Summary: There was fault by the Council, because it did not arrange alternative provision for a child who could not attend school, and the Council has agreed to offer a financial remedy to reflect his loss of education. The Council was also at fault because of a delay in responding to the complaint, but this did not cause an injustice.

  • Kent County Council (24 011 893)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 10-Nov-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of an Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council has offered a suitable remedy, and the dispute about special educational provision carried a SEND Tribunal right which it was reasonable for Miss Y to use.

  • Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council (24 012 171)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 10-Nov-2025

    Summary: Miss X complained that the Council failed to provide appropriate support for her daughter, J. We find that the Council failed to issue a final Education, Health and Care Plan, failed to ensure J received all the provision set out in her Plan, and failed to ensure she received the support it had identified she needed as a child in need. The Council has agreed to apologise, make payments to Miss X and J, and issue a final Plan without further delay. It has also agreed to make service improvements.

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