Commercial and contracts


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Enfield (19 010 925)

    Statement Not upheld Commercial and contracts 31-Mar-2020

    Summary: There is no evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with a tendering exercise for businesses to provide services.

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (19 012 493)

    Statement Not upheld Commercial and contracts 06-Mar-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council dealt with his tenancy of a retail business. He said it delayed issuing a lease and made his business unviable. We will not investigate Mr X's complaint because it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, we cannot achieve the outcome he wants, and he had an alternative, available legal remedy.

  • Luton Borough Council (19 004 404)

    Statement Upheld Commercial and contracts 25-Feb-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council's failure to formalise its relationship with his company. He said its failure to do so has caused his company financial and reputational loss. We found the Council took too long to decide Mr X needed to tender for new work. It has apologised which is an appropriate remedy. We will not investigate its actions before 2018 because Mr X could have complained about them to it, and us, sooner.

  • Broxtowe Borough Council (19 009 445)

    Statement Upheld Commercial and contracts 11-Feb-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman found fault by the Council on Mr W's complaint about its failure to promptly act to resolve the drainage issue affecting the garages he rents from it. It failed to do works it said it would, failed to show evidence of works done, and failed to clear vegetation. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused. It was not fault for the Council to insist he continues to pay the rent he agreed to pay for them.

  • Southampton City Council (19 005 106)

    Statement Upheld Commercial and contracts 12-Dec-2019

    Summary: The Council failed to act in accordance with the terms of its framework agreement for contracts with Mr C, by refusing mediation. This has caused time and trouble for Mr C. The Council will apologise and refer the matter to mediation.

  • Liverpool City Council (19 000 780)

    Statement Upheld Commercial and contracts 06-Dec-2019

    Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council dealt with her social enterprise business. We find that the Council took too long to agree a lease for her use of its venue. This caused uncertainty. The Council has agreed to waive rental for the two years of uncertainty caused by its delay. It has agreed to apologise to Miss X for uncertainty caused by this fault. The Council has adequately explained why it has decided to charge rental for her social enterprise business, having regard to its circumstances, its procurement strategy and guidance.

  • Harrogate Borough Council (19 000 420)

    Statement Upheld Commercial and contracts 21-Nov-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman found fault by the Council in the way it dealt with the tendering process it invited Mr B to bid on. The Council failed to explain the first tender was withdrawn and all bids now had to be on the second tender. He received a reminder email on the first tender and an acknowledgement when he sent his bid even though this was archived. The agreed action remedies the avoidable injustice caused.

  • Birmingham City Council (19 001 788)

    Statement Not upheld Commercial and contracts 21-Nov-2019

    Summary: Ms B complains that the Council failed to honour its agreement to allow providers who were unsuccessful in tendering for the supply of home support services to enter the fixed-price market. The Ombudsman finds no fault on the Council's part. It did not agree to allow unsuccessful providers to enter the fixed-price market as contracts were issued to those providers who were successful in the tendering process. It offered support to help unsuccessful providers adjust their business model to deliver services in the fixed-price market. This support was offered to Ms B.

  • Durham County Council (18 017 480)

    Statement Not upheld Commercial and contracts 04-Oct-2019

    Summary: Mr C says the Council was at fault for insisting he should demolish a garage he rented at the end of his rental agreement. He says he rented the site with a garage already on it and should not have to demolish it. The Council was not at fault. Mr C signed a contract which explicitly required him to demolish the garage. The Council is not at fault for relying on the signed contract.

  • Birmingham City Council (19 001 312)

    Statement Not upheld Commercial and contracts 12-Aug-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains there was fault in the way the Council dealt with a tender process he took part in. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X's complaint further. It is unlikely we could achieve a worthwhile remedy and Mr X may challenge the decision in court.