Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Kingston Upon Hull City Council (19 005 684)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 16-Jun-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council acted in a biased way towards a training provider and it was not transparent in its response to his communications and his complaint. We upheld the complaint. Mr X also complained the Council failed to consider concerns raised about the conduct and standards at the training provider. We found the Council should have considered the concerns raised and it had failed to do so. The Council has now taken action by amending its taxi driver application pack. The Council should also apologise, pay the Association £250 and consider the concerns raised about standards.

  • Leeds City Council (19 011 936)

    Statement Not upheld Licensing 19-Mar-2020

    Summary: There is no evidence of fault in how the Council carried out an inspection of Mr C's private hire vehicle.

  • Bristol City Council (19 015 501)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 12-Feb-2020

    Summary: Mr X complains that the Council did not apply the proper discounts before charging him for a property licence. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because the Council has agreed to take appropriate action to remedy any injustice to Mr X.

  • Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council (19 006 308)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 07-Feb-2020

    Summary: Mrs C complains about the Council's consideration of an application to vary an existing premises licence for a nearby restaurant which she says causes unacceptable levels of noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour. The Ombudsman has found fault by the Council but considers the agreed actions of an apology, £100 and review of procedures are enough to provide a suitable remedy.

  • Wyre Forest District Council (19 008 861)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 30-Jan-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman found fault by the Council on Miss P's complaint of it giving her incorrect information about charges for practitioner and premises registration when she relocated a business to its area. The Council gave her incorrect information about the cost. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

  • Transport for London (18 009 383)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 27-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained Transport for London took too long to renew his private hire licence and so he lost income as he was unable to work. Transport for London was at fault as it delayed assessing Mr X's application, so he was unable to work for four weeks. It has agreed to make a payment to Mr X to reflect his lost earnings.

  • Royal Borough of Greenwich (19 003 436)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 27-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr C says the Council delayed considering his application for an HMO licence which means he now requires planning permission which he could have avoided if the Council had processed his application promptly. Fault by the Council did not result in Mr B's HMO licence application being determined after the rules had changed.

  • Tendring District Council (19 005 923)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 23-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council's failure to resolve her complaints about a neighbouring development, causing her to suffer loss of enjoyment and stress. The Ombudsman finds the Council failed to follow its planning enforcement policy, causing Mrs X injustice. The Ombudsman recommends the Council provides an apology, makes a payment and takes action.

  • Nottingham City Council (19 006 245)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 22-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr X says the Council wrongly said a smoking area was in breach of regulations forcing the company he acts for to take costly legal advice. The decision to seek legal advice was made within 10 days of the situation arising and when no threat of legal action against the company had been made. This was a business decision made with no expectation it would be reimbursed but to speed up the process and limit potential further costs.

  • Wiltshire Council (19 006 396)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 10-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr B says the Council delayed processing his application for a scrap metal dealer's licence, failed to tell him it would not accept him as a suitable person for a licence until his criminal conviction expired and delayed responding to his communications. There was delay processing the application, the Council wrongly asked Mr B for updated DBS checks and failed to respond to some of his communications. Payment to cover two of the DBS checks, payment to Mr B to reflect his time and trouble pursuing the complaint and an apology is satisfactory remedy.