Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Bromley (20 004 816)

    Statement Not upheld Other 20-Nov-2020

    Summary: The complainant brought a complaint alleging defamation by the Council which he perceives has damaged his reputation. The Ombudsman does not have jurisdiction to consider a complaint for defamation and he cannot enforce a remedy associated with this. Further, the complainant complains the Council has unfairly restricted his contact with councillors and staff, though the Ombudsman cannot determine any fault in this regard.

  • Torbay Council (20 000 829)

    Statement Upheld Other 20-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council incorrectly spelt his middle name on his father's death certificate and required a £90 payment to amend this. Mr X says he has paid to have this amended but the Council has refused to refund his payment. The Ombudsman has found fault with the Council. The Council agreed to refund Mr X the £90 fee and provide an apology.

  • Blackburn with Darwen Council (20 004 795)

    Statement Upheld Other 26-Oct-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council providing misinformation when trying to register a death. This is because the Ombudsman would not be able to achieve the outcomes the complainant wants, and because an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

  • Spelthorne Borough Council (19 016 359)

    Statement Upheld Other 28-Sep-2020

    Summary: Mrs X says the Council is at fault in how it handled her request to lease a building it owned. The Ombudsman has found fault by the Council in this matter which resulted in Mrs X's expectations being raised and put her to avoidable expense, time and trouble in pursuing a lease. In recognition of the injustice caused to her he recommended the Council apologises and pays her £750. The Council agreed.

  • London Borough of Waltham Forest (19 016 717)

    Statement Upheld Other 02-Sep-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not tell her it had organised a community event at the same Council venue and time as her wedding ceremony. The Council was at fault. It failed to advise Mrs X of the planned event and its marketing material did not make it clear the venue may be open for public events at the same time. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X and pay her £150 to acknowledge the frustration and distress caused.

  • Birmingham City Council (19 008 037)

    Statement Not upheld Other 24-Aug-2020

    Summary: Mr F complains the Council has overcharged for the installation and maintenance of vehicle activated speed signs. The Ombudsman has found no fault.

  • Royal Borough of Greenwich (20 001 975)

    Statement Upheld Other 17-Aug-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a delay by the Council in issuing a £1.50 refund. This is because the Council has provided a proportionate response and there is not enough injustice to warrant an investigation.

  • Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (19 016 861)

    Statement Upheld Other 11-Aug-2020

    Summary: Mr X says poor organisation by the Council ruined his wedding day. The Council accepted fault because it did not inform Mr X trainee registrars would attend his wedding ceremony and offered him a partial refund of the wedding fee. There was fault by the Council which caused an injustice to Mr X. The Council took action to remedy that injustice.

  • Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (19 017 586)

    Statement Not upheld Other 04-Aug-2020

    Summary: Mr D complains at the reply he received to a letter and enclosures he sent to the Council in October 2019. We do not uphold the complaint finding no fault in the Council's reply or else using our discretion not to continue with the investigation.

  • London Borough of Enfield (20 000 703)

    Statement Upheld Other 17-Jul-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X's complaint about a council survey and delays in responding to his concerns. This is because the Council has agreed to the remedy Mr X asked for, and it is unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman could achieve anything more.

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.