City of Wolverhampton Council (24 022 882)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 10-Jul-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of concerns he raised about a licenced taxi owner following an accident. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (25 002 422)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 02-Jul-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about private hire vehicle licensing because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (24 017 492)

Statement Upheld Licensing 29-Jun-2025

Summary: The Council was at fault because of a lengthy delay in making a decision the complainant had applied for the wrong type of landlord licence, and then threatening him with a significant fine for not holding the correct licence, without considering the fact the complainant had followed the Council’s own advice in making his application in the first place. The Council had already offered an appropriate remedy, but it has now also agreed to formally apologise to the complainant for this.

North Norfolk District Council (25 006 561)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 29-Jun-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council handled business license applications. Parts of her complaint are late and there are no good reasons why it could not have been made sooner. And of the parts remaining, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (24 023 170)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 24-Jun-2025

Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to resolve Mr X’s complaints about residents of a nearby housing association property since 2022. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner. We have no discretion to investigate complaints about the management of tenancies by social housing landlords.

Lancaster City Council (24 015 140)

Statement Upheld Licensing 16-Jun-2025

Summary: Mr B complained the Council misled him about what he had to do to meet the licensing requirements and lied to him about what was required. The Council gave Mr B only one option to meet the licensing requirements despite the fact there were other options available. That is fault and leaves Mr B with some uncertainty about whether some of his costs could have been avoided. A payment of 50% of Mr B’s costs, a payment to him for distress, an apology and reminder to officers is satisfactory remedy.

Transport for London (24 018 791)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 16-Jun-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about private hire vehicle licensing because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, we cannot achieve the outcome Mr Y is seeking and it is reasonable for Mr Y to use his right of appeal to go to court.

London Borough of Waltham Forest (25 000 384)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 15-Jun-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about licensing because it is late without good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now.

Cambridge City Council (25 000 800)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 15-Jun-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about taxi licensing. This is because the complaint is late, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Westmorland and Furness Council (23 015 689)

Statement Upheld Licensing 09-Jun-2025

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to follow procedure when considering an application for a premises licence. The Council granted the licence. Mr X says the new pub creates a noise nuisance. The Ombudsman has found the Council at fault for failing to consult with the responsible authority for planning. It is unlikely the planning authority would have objected to the application; the result would have been the same. There is therefore no injustice to Mr X.