Privacy settings

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.


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Bromsgrove District Council (21 006 098)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 10-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council's handling of his complaints about noise nuisance, antisocial behaviour, and breach of licence conditions regarding a pub near his property. We find fault with the Council for not properly considering Mr X's complaints about antisocial behaviour. We do not find fault with the Council's actions in relation to Mr X's complaints about noise nuisance and breach of licence conditions. We have made recommendations.

  • City of York Council (21 010 595)

    Statement Not upheld Licensing 25-Feb-2022

    Summary: The Ombudsman exercised discretion not to investigate Mr D's complaint about the Council failing to follow the correct procedure when it approved a minor variation application sent by a neighbouring business. This is because he could have appealed a later review hearing which considered his evidence and concerns about the application. In addition, we could not achieve any worthwhile achievable outcome by investigating further.

  • Birmingham City Council (21 006 869)

    Statement Not upheld Licensing 22-Feb-2022

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council's decision to increase its street trading licence fees. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to revise its street trading policy and increase its fees for consents.

  • Northumberland County Council (21 006 778)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 14-Feb-2022

    Summary: The Council was at fault when it incorrectly advised Mr X about the type of licence needed for his new business. The Council has agreed to pay Mr X £300 in recognition of avoidable frustration and raised expectations caused by this fault. The Council has also agreed to our service improvement recommendation.

  • Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council (21 004 205)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 11-Jan-2022

    Summary: Mr B complained about how the Council considered his applications for a private hire vehicle licence transfer and dual hackney carriage and private hire drivers licence extension. He said that as a result of the Council's failings and delays he was unable to work. There was fault which caused injustice. The Council will apologise and make a payment to Mr B.

  • Transport for London (21 001 629)

    Statement Not upheld Licensing 02-Dec-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained Transport for London wrongly refused to accept a medical declaration form completed by a private doctor and delayed in renewing his private hire driver's licence. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Transport for London considered Mr X's application renew his private hire driver's licence.

  • Middlesbrough Borough Council (21 004 475)

    Statement Not upheld Licensing 29-Nov-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained about the consultation process and basis on which the Council decided to continue a selective licensing area scheme. There was no fault.

  • Malvern Hills District Council (21 004 138)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 24-Nov-2021

    Summary: The Council was at fault for the way it responded to Mr X's concerns about a site licence. This caused Mr X injustice as he continues to experience problems with the site owner about his council tax payments and does not know what he can do to address this. The Council has agreed to meet with Mr X to discuss his outstanding concerns.

  • North Lincolnshire Council (21 001 207)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 07-Oct-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains about delay in the Council issuing his taxi license renewal. He also says the Council delayed in issuing his license after he passed the safeguarding course. We find fault with the Council for providing Mr X with incorrect information in its complaint response. However, the fault did not cause Mr X any injustice. We do not find fault with the Council's other actions.

  • London Borough of Brent (20 014 423)

    Statement Not upheld Licensing 28-Sep-2021

    Summary: The Council served Ms Y with a notice requiring her to abate statutory nuisance in a House of Multiple Occupancy. Ms Y complains she faced unnecessary expense when appealing the notice because the Council withdrew it without her knowledge. We do not find fault because there is evidence the Council told Ms Y of its decision to withdraw the notice. We have discontinued our investigation into the other parts of Ms Y's complaint because she has already used an alternative legal remedy.