Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Environment Agency (18 011 626)

    Statement Not upheld Other 13-May-2019

    Summary: Mr X says the Environment Agency is at fault for not acting to address flooding caused by an unauthorised dam located in a primary watercourse. The Ombudsman has not found any evidence of fault by the Environment Agency and for this reason he has ended his investigation of this complaint.

  • Cheshire West & Chester Council (18 012 059)

    Statement Not upheld Other 10-May-2019

    Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain that in requiring and then approving changes to the layout of the access road to a hotel opposite their house, the Council did not consider the impact headlight glare would have. The Ombudsman found no fault in the Council's approach to deciding this planning application.

  • Colchester Borough Council (18 011 750)

    Statement Upheld Other 09-May-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to properly investigate her complaint of a statutory nuisance caused by burning waste on a neighbouring property. She also complains the Council has poorly managed her complaint. There was no fault in how the Council investigated the matter. However, there was some fault it how it communicated with Mrs X. It gave Mrs X wrong advice and did not inform her of the outcome of a site visit. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X and remind its staff of the law related to waste management and the need to keep complainants informed during statutory nuisance investigations.

  • Herefordshire Council (17 001 105)

    Statement Upheld Other 08-May-2019

    Summary: Mrs B complains that the Council failed to properly test samples taken from her private water supply so the results were inaccurate causing her to waste time and money in trying to improve the water quality unnecessarily. The Ombudsman finds the Council was at fault because the laboratory acting on its behalf failed to test the samples within the recommended timescale but this did not cause Mrs B an injustice because the delay did not affect the results.

  • London Borough of Merton (18 015 509)

    Statement Not upheld Other 01-May-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to take appropriate action to deal with a car parked outside his property for 18 months. There was no fault in the Council's actions.

  • Birmingham City Council (18 010 480)

    Statement Upheld Other 30-Apr-2019

    Summary: Miss X complains about the Council's response to reports she has made of fly-tipping and dumped rubbish in her local area. The Ombudsman found although the Council was not at fault in most of its responses to Miss X's reports, its failure to properly manage her expectations was fault. This caused Miss X an injustice through uncertainty and frustration. The Council agreed to the Ombudsman's recommendation it should apologise, explain how it will deal with Miss X's reports in future and publish more information on its website about its service standards.

  • Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council (18 013 165)

    Statement Not upheld Other 10-Apr-2019

    Summary: Mr Y complained on behalf of Mr X, that the Council failed to repair and maintain the public toilets at Oldham bus station. The Council is not at fault.

  • Mole Valley District Council (18 009 826)

    Statement Not upheld Other 28-Mar-2019

    Summary: The Council acted without fault and proportionately in responding to concerns about grass cutting and about concerns over health and safety shortcomings of contractor staff.

  • Shropshire Council (17 019 370)

    Statement Not upheld Other 26-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mr C complains the Council did not use its powers to keep a listed building safe and properly maintained. Mr C says the condition of the building deteriorated to represent a safety hazard and has a harmful impact on the amenity of the local area. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault by the Council.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (18 009 048)

    Statement Upheld Other 12-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not tell him it was going to remove his forklift and trailer from private land and destroy them. The Ombudsman finds there was some fault in the Council's procedures but the fault did not cause Mr X significant injustice. The Council has agreed to review and update its abandoned vehicles policy.