Liverpool City Council (25 013 578)

Statement Upheld Other 28-Jun-2026

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s refusal to progress his complaint to stage two of the statutory children’s complaints procedure and respond to his later complaint about housing. We found the Council to be at fault because it took nine months to acknowledge his later complaint, despite Mr X sending several reminders. This caused Mr X significant frustration and distress. To remedy this injustice, the Council agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment. We did not find fault with the Council’s initial decision to not proceed with the statutory procedure.

Warwick District Council (25 023 943)

Statement Upheld Other 28-Jun-2026

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about damage to his property. This is because we are unlikely to add to the Council’s response. It is also reasonable for Mr X to pursue the matter through the courts.

Birmingham City Council (25 015 379)

Statement Not upheld Other 22-Jun-2026

Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint, about the Council’s handling of the complainant’s request for disabled adaptations to his home. This is because the complaint concerns the Council’s duties as a social landlord, which means it is not in our jurisdiction.

Bedford Borough Council (25 010 720)

Statement Upheld Other 17-Jun-2026

Summary: Ms D complains the Council damaged her possessions when moving them. It had made her sign a waiver under duress. It offered her a payment for the damage, but it did not accept liability. Our decision is the offer of payment is a suitable way of resolving the complaint and, so, does not leave enough personal injustice to warrant further investigation. But we find fault with the wording of the Council’s “removal and pre-storage disclaimer. The Council has agreed to amend the wording of that document.

London Borough of Hounslow (25 012 019)

Statement Upheld Other 14-Jun-2026

Summary: We found fault on Miss Y’s complaint about the Council failing to reimburse the deposit and advance payment of rent it agreed to pay. It delayed progressing her request and delayed telling her what documents she still needed to send. Communication with her was poor and not always accurate. The Council agreed to apologise for the fault, make a symbolic payment, and review why the delays and poor communication happened.

London Borough of Southwark (25 020 400)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 07-Jun-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a district heating system. For part of the complaint, it would be reasonable for Mr X to seek a remedy in court and for the remainder of it, there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our involvement.

Leicester City Council (25 026 871)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 02-Jun-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about disputed leasehold charges as it is reasonable to expect the complainant to take his case to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).

Northumberland County Council (25 001 611)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 01-Jun-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr B’s complaint because we cannot add to the previous investigation completed by the Council.

North Northamptonshire Council (25 028 910)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 21-May-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint alleging the Council lost Miss X’s property. This is because it is reasonable to expect Miss X to take her claim for lost possessions to court. We also would not investigate her concerns about the Council not responding to her complaint or her requests for information. This is because we do not look at complaints handling when we are not looking at the underlying matter. And the Information Commissioner is better placed to look at Miss X’s concerns about missing information.

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (25 029 156)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 21-May-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about issues arising from fence damage. This is because it is reasonable to expect Ms X to go to court. We also will not investigate Ms X’s concerns about the adequacy of the Council’s responses as it would not be proportionate when we are not considering the underlying issues.