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 52507 results

  • Durham County Council (25 002 481)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 15-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a section 7 report. This is because the law prevents us from considering what happens in court.

  • Southend-on-Sea City Council (25 003 398)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 15-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax liability because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.

  • East Sussex County Council (25 003 432)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 15-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about educational support. We cannot investigate whether the support level should have been higher as this was subject to a Tribunal appeal. We are unlikely to gain a significantly different outcome than the Council’s offered refund.

  • Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (25 003 586)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax support 15-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax liability and Council tax support because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.

  • Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (25 005 182)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Leisure and culture 15-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council altered a park. The complaint is late and there is no good reason why it could not have been made sooner.

  • London Borough of Wandsworth (24 014 250)

    Statement Upheld Other 12-Jun-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to act when she contacted it with concerns about her late brother’s care and it was difficult to get in contact with anyone. She also complained the care home the Council commissioned failed to get an air mattress for her late brother before he went into hospital and the care home failed to treat his urine infection. We find fault with the care home’s communication with Mrs X and the care it provided to her late brother. The Council was at fault for its communication with Mrs X. These faults have caused Mrs X upset, distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to apologise to Mrs X and make a payment to her.

  • Medway Council (24 014 785)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 12-Jun-2025

    Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed issuing her child’s first Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan, did not provide a suitable secondary school place, and failed to provide alternative education. There was delay in issuing a final EHC Plan and delayed appeal rights, but no failure to provide education. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Ms X £1000 to acknowledge the fault, and make service improvements.

  • St Albans City Council (24 015 142)

    Statement Upheld Planning applications 12-Jun-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained there was fault in the Council’s assessment of a neighbouring planning application. Mrs X said the new development will be overbearing, and she will suffer loss of privacy and reduced residential amenity. We found there was fault in the Council’s initial assessment of the application by considering it against the wrong policy. However, there was no injustice because the Council re-assessed the application under the correct policy. We found no fault in the Council’s updated assessment or decision-making.

  • St Albans City Council (24 015 242)

    Statement Upheld Planning applications 12-Jun-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council assessed a neighbouring planning application. Mr X said the new development will be overbearing and cause loss of privacy and overlooking to his home. We found there was fault in the Council’s initial assessment of the application by considering it against the wrong policy. However, there was no injustice because the Council re-assessed the application under the correct policy. We found no fault in the Council’s updated assessment or decision-making.

  • Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (24 015 718)

    Statement Upheld School transport 12-Jun-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to suitably consider his application and appeal for home to school transport for his child. We did not find fault with the Council’s decision to refuse home to school transport for Mr X’s child. We did find fault with the Council failing to follow its process. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X for failing to follow its process. The Council also agreed to provide training to staff about following its process and including relevant information about how to appeal decisions.

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