Decision search


What's this ?
  • Organisation
  • Decision type

  • Reference number
  • Date range

     

  • Sort Results

Show advanced search

Your search has 53967 results

  • North Lincolnshire Council (25 011 351)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 28-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s school’s admissions appeal panel refusing her appeal. It is unlikely we would find fault which caused Mrs X to lose out on a school place.

  • Reigate & Banstead Borough Council (25 011 583)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 28-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax liability because it relates to a body out of jurisdiction there is ultimately a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.

  • Manchester City Council (25 011 764)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 28-Sep-2025

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

  • Hart District Council (25 012 010)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 28-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Mr X’s complaint regarding flags placed on his local high street. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to result in finding fault with the Council’s actions.

  • Torbay Council (25 012 248)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Private housing 28-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council refused to take enforcement action against his landlord. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

  • Cornwall Council (25 012 994)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 28-Sep-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice he received for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Mr C to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (24 015 484)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 28-Sep-2025

    Summary: Ms F complained on behalf of her mother that the Council failed to deal with possible breaches of planning control and building regulations by her neighbour. We found the Council failed to keep Ms F updated, causing her frustration. The Council has agreed to apologise for this. There was no fault in the way the Council decided there was no breach of planning control or in the actions it took in relation to a building control breach. There was delay and poor record keeping but this did not cause injustice to Ms F or her mother.

  • London Borough of Waltham Forest (24 016 161)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 28-Sep-2025

    Summary: Mr A complained on behalf of Mr B about the Council’s decision to cease Mr B’s Education, Health and Care Plan in 2020 and failure to support him to get back into education since then. We found the Council was at fault for the delay in the Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment process from March 2024 and records keeping around its decision for additional funding for Mr B’s social care support. The Council agreed to our recommendations on what to do to remedy the injustice its faults caused to Mr B.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (24 017 739)

    Statement Upheld Disabled facilities grants 28-Sep-2025

    Summary: Mrs Y complains about delays in the Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) process which she says have caused significant distress. We find delay in the processing of Mrs Y’s DFG which the Council will acknowledge with an apology and a symbolic payment of £500. The Council will also progress Mrs Y’s DFG referral without further delay and create an action plan to help reduce delays in DFG processing.

  • Cheshire East Council (24 017 816)

    Statement Upheld Charging 28-Sep-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council incorrectly assessed his mother’s disability related expenditure when reviewing her financial assessment linked to care costs. We found fault because the Council applied a blanket approach to the disability related costs it would write off which it should not have done. To remedy the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and his mother, review her financial assessment, update its charging policy and guidance and share this with relevant staff.

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