Decision search
Your search has 52298 results
-
London Borough of Croydon (24 012 078)
Statement Upheld Refuse and recycling 21-May-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council provided an inadequate refuse service for her clinical waste. The Council was at fault for poor record keeping, failing to investigate Mrs X’s concerns appropriately and for providing inaccurate information about changes to its service. This caused Mrs X avoidable frustration and uncertainty for which the Council will apologise and pay £150. It will also update the information available to residents on what waste can go in general waste bins.
-
Royal Borough of Greenwich (24 012 829)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 21-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application since 2019. We will not exercise discretion to consider events before the complaint to the Council in 2024. These matters occurred outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints about them. There is no evidence to suggest that Mrs X could not have complained to us sooner.
-
North East Lincolnshire Council (24 013 002)
Statement Upheld Planning applications 21-May-2025
Summary: Miss B complained that the Council approved a planning application for development next to her property without good reasons and against the officer’s recommendation to refuse it. We have found fault in that the Council failed to provide any reasons for the decision which caused significant distress and uncertainty to Miss B as to why the decision had been made. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss B, pay her £500 and provide training to members of the planning committee.
-
Nottinghamshire County Council (24 016 102)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 21-May-2025
Summary: Mr X complained that the Council failed to ensure his child (Y) received the specialist provision set out in their Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan. The Council failed to ensure Occupational Therapy (OT) was in place from September 2024 to date. This caused Mr X distress, frustration and uncertainty and meant Y’s needs went unmet for longer than necessary. The Council has agreed to make a payment to recognise this.
-
Swale Borough Council (24 016 119)
Statement Not upheld Disabled facilities grants 21-May-2025
Summary: Mr X complained that the Council said he does not qualify for a Disabled Facilities Grant. There was no fault on the part of the Council.
-
Westminster City Council (24 016 228)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 21-May-2025
Summary: Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of housing offers made to her, she says the Council issued different contractual agreements. Ms X also says the Council failed to review the suitability of her property. Ms X says this caused her distress and frustration. We have found fault in the Council’s issuing of housing offers and failing to review the suitability of the property offered to Ms X. The Council has agreed to issue Ms X with an apology, pay her a financial payment and complete a suitability review and service improvements.
-
St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (24 016 481)
Statement Not upheld Other 21-May-2025
Summary: Mrs Y complained that the Council unreasonably refused to complete stage two of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. We find no fault in the Council’s actions or decision making.
-
Staffordshire County Council (24 016 721)
Statement Not upheld Charging 21-May-2025
Summary: Mrs Y, acting for Mrs X, complained about the outcome of the financial assessment carried out by the Council for Mrs X. She also complained about the Council’s failure to apply for a deprivation of liberty in the community order for Mrs X. Since Mrs Y came to us, the Council has decided to apply for the court order and to disregard Mrs X’s property until the order is issued. We have ended this investigation as there is nothing else we could achieve for Mrs X.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 017 074)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 21-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council responded to her reports of noise and other nuisance. It is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s actions.
-
London Borough of Tower Hamlets (24 005 075)
Statement Upheld Antisocial behaviour 21-May-2025
Summary: There was fault in the way the Council responded to the complainant’s reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB) in her building. The Council did not give proper consideration to the complainant’s needs or to its full toolkit of powers for tackling ASB, did not follow its own ASB policy as a landlord, made a series of errors in undertaking an ASB case review, and delayed updating its risk assessment of the complainant and responding to her formal complaint. This caused distress and frustration to the complainant, for which the Council has agreed to apologise and offer a financial remedy. The Council has also agreed to undertake a new ASB case review and circulate guidance to relevant staff on the ASB case review process.