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 52298 results

  • Torbay Council (24 023 446)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Highway repair and maintenance 03-Apr-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that she suffered injuries after tripping on a damaged pavement. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs B to take the Council to court.

  • London Borough of Havering (24 015 294)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Refuse and recycling 03-Apr-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing an environmental Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN) and the Council’s complaint handling. This is because the complaint is late, and there are no good reasons to exercise our discretion to investigate it now.

  • London Borough of Hackney (24 003 887)

    Report Upheld Transport 03-Apr-2025

    Summary: Mrs D complained the Council refused to renew her Blue Badge. Our investigation has found fault in the advice given to staff who work at the Council’s assessment centre and assess Blue Badge applications.

  • East Lindsey District Council (24 003 964)

    Statement Upheld Private housing 02-Apr-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to award a home energy grant for solar panels instead of double glazing. We found the Council to be at fault because its contractor did not follow the procedure set out in government guidance. This caused Mr X frustration. To remedy this injustice, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment and review its procedures.

  • Staffordshire County Council (24 002 444)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 02-Apr-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council placed contact restrictions on his visits to his late partner, Mrs Y, who was living in a Council commissioned care home. The Council was at fault for not clearly explaining they were recommendations and the reasons for them. It has agreed to apologise to Mr X for the distress and frustration this caused and to review its procedures to prevent a recurrence of the fault. Mr X also complained the care home did not tell him his partner was put on end of life care when she was admitted to the care home. There was no fault as Mrs Y was not on end of life care when she moved into the care home. Mr X was made aware when she was nearing the end of her life.

  • London Borough of Bromley (24 005 787)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 02-Apr-2025

    Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide a suitable school placement for her child. Miss X also complained the Council ignored her contact and failed to provide her with suitable updates. We found fault with the Council delaying the search for a school placement for Miss X’s child for four months and for complaint handling delays amounting to 12 weeks. The Council agreed to apologise to Miss X and pay her £250 for the inconvenience and distress caused.

  • London Borough of Croydon (24 007 083)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 02-Apr-2025

    Summary: We have found the Council at fault for failing to provide Miss X and her family with suitable accommodation for an extended period of time. This caused them avoidable injustice. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice.

  • Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (24 007 681)

    Statement Upheld Allocations 02-Apr-2025

    Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to properly consider her application for housing assistance. We found the Council’s consideration of the application via homelessness legislation was appropriate. However, there were delays in assessing the application and granting housing priority points. We recommended an apology and a modest payment to reflect the issues we identified.

  • London Borough of Lambeth (24 007 775)

    Statement Not upheld Allocations 02-Apr-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her housing allocation. She said being placed in her current banding means she cannot bid on suitable properties. The Council was not at fault.

  • Bristol City Council (24 008 451)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 02-Apr-2025

    Summary: Mr B complained that the Council did not correctly consider an application to vary conditions in a previously granted planning permission. We found the Council at fault. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B in recognition of the injustice caused.

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