Decision search


What's this ?
  • Organisation
  • Decision type

  • Reference number
  • Date range

     

  • Sort Results

Show advanced search

Your search has 55884 results

  • Plymouth City Council (24 018 235)

    Statement Upheld Antisocial behaviour 22-Oct-2025

    Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s response to her reports of noise, anti-social behaviour and light nuisance from a nearby business. We have found the Council at fault in wrongly closing Miss X’s original report but consider the action it has already taken provided a suitable remedy to Miss X. The Council has also agreed further action to avoid a reoccurrence.

  • London Borough of Tower Hamlets (24 018 845)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 22-Oct-2025

    Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s failure to secure a specialist teacher as set out in her child’s the Education, Health and Care Plan. We found the Council at fault and the lack of a specialist teacher was distressing for Miss X and caused uncertainty for her child. To address that injustice, the Council agreed our recommendations to apologise to Miss X and make a symbolic payment of £400.

  • Essex County Council (25 006 978)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 22-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Education Health and Care needs assessment process. When considering this complaint, the council agreed to pay X £100 for each month of delay in it issuing a decision. This is a suitable remedy for injustice and there are no wider public interest issues to justify investigating this complaint.

  • South Staffordshire District Council (25 007 226)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 22-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council approving a planning application for a residential development which is further away from a bus stop than is normally recommended. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council assessed the application, and the complainant has not been caused a significant injustice.

  • Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (25 007 282)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 22-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement case. There is sufficient evidence that fault in the enforcement process has caused the complainant a significant injustice, and an investigation is unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome.

  • Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (25 007 569)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Public transport 22-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Authority’s handling of her transport survey complaint. This is because there is not enough remaining injustice and an investigation would be unlikely to reach a different outcome.

  • London Borough of Ealing (25 007 593)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 22-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council responded to Miss B’s communication. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

  • Warwickshire County Council (25 007 614)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 22-Oct-2025

    Summary: We cannot investigate most of Mr X’s complaints about the actions of the Council’s children’s services and a court report because they relate to matters being considered by a court. We will not investigate the earlier matters because they relate too closely to the later court proceedings.

  • London Borough of Tower Hamlets (25 007 623)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 22-Oct-2025

    Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council unfairly issued him with six Penalty Charge Notices. Mr X used his right of appeal to a tribunal, so we have no power to investigate.

  • Kent County Council (25 007 833)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Traffic management 22-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to widen a narrow stretch of road. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

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