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.

Other


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Cherwell District Council (21 007 194)

    Statement Not upheld Other 02-Mar-2022

    Summary: Miss B complains that the Council incorrectly told her she could buy the rest of her 'shared ownership' home at a discount, then, after realising its mistake, withdrew the discount. This meant she could not afford to proceed with the purchase. She says the Council's error meant she spent money on conveyancing fees which she would not otherwise have spent. The Council has already made a suitable offer to remedy her injustice, so we have discontinued our investigation.

  • London Borough of Lewisham (21 014 433)

    Statement Upheld Other 28-Feb-2022

    Summary: The Council failed to provide evidence of compliance with a remedy it previously agreed with the Ombudsman. In the original complaint, we found the Council failed to investigate Mr B's complaint The Council agreed to make a financial payment to recognise the impact of its fault. The Council was at fault for not paying Mr B or keeping records of its attempts to do so. The Council will review its internal procedure for ensuring compliance with, and providing evidence of, recommendations made by the Ombudsman to prevent future injustice to others.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (20 014 185)

    Statement Upheld Other 25-Jan-2022

    Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to take action about the antisocial behaviour from her neighbours since June 2019. Ms X says her neighbours actions put her safety at risk and has impacted her mental health. Ms X says her neighbour's relatives are also harassing her for complaining to the Council. The Ombudsman found fault with the Council for its inaction and delays in handling Ms X's concerns. The Ombudsman also found fault with the Council's record keeping creating uncertainty about the Council's investigations. The Council agreed to the Ombudsman's recommendation to open a new investigation for Ms X into her concerns and follows its procedure in completing these investigations. The Council also agreed to provide Ms X with an apology and a payment of £500 to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused.

  • Hartlepool Borough Council (20 010 673)

    Statement Not upheld Other 12-Jan-2022

    Summary: Ms Y and four neighbours complain about the Council's plan to remove electric gates it installed on their road in 2015. Ms Y also complains about the Council's failure to fully remove knotweed from her property despite agreeing to do so. We do not to find fault with the Council. It is entitled to install manual gates if the current gates are not serving their purpose. Furthermore, there is no evidence the Council has agreed to eradicate the knotweed as Ms Y suggests.

  • Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (20 013 986)

    Statement Not upheld Other 16-Sep-2021

    Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint. This is because the complainant has not provided enough information for us to proceed.

  • London Borough of Lewisham (20 004 835)

    Statement Upheld Other 20-Apr-2021

    Summary: Mr B complains the Council did not respond to his complaint about his supported accommodation. This caused Mr B frustration and put him to time and trouble pursuing his complaint. We found fault with the Council causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy this injustice.

  • London Borough of Hillingdon (19 019 162)

    Statement Not upheld Other 13-Jan-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the condition of a garage she rented from the Council. She also complained the Council communicated poorly, failed to take action, and did not fully respond to her complaint. The Ombudsman found no evidence of fault in the way the Council responded to Mrs X's reports about damage to the garage she rented.

  • Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (19 012 606)

    Statement Upheld Other 18-Dec-2020

    Summary: Ms X complains about the Council's decision to not backdate her food allowance payments. The Council was at fault for failing to make sure residents were aware of the food payments. This resulted in Ms X not applying for the food payment until she was told by the Council, causing her to miss out on a backdated claim. The Council has agreed to backdate her food payments to remedy the injustice caused.

  • Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (19 016 517)

    Statement Upheld Other 16-Nov-2020

    Summary: Ms X complains about how the Council handled her move with its Homestart Scheme and damage to her belongings during the move. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault for not telling Ms X about the 7 day deadline to report damaged items, the time taken to progress the complaint with the removal contractor and for the standard of its complaint handling. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused to Ms X.

  • New Forest District Council (19 016 330)

    Statement Not upheld Other 13-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained that the Council did not let him use its rent in advance and deposit scheme to rent out his property when taking on his latest tenant. Mr X says the Council has applied a blanket-ban for the use of his property on the scheme without explanation. The Ombudsman did not find fault with the actions of the Council.