Southend-on-Sea Borough Council (20 009 892)
Statement Upheld Other 02-Dec-2021
Summary: Ms X complained about the Council's service she received in relation to her marriage ceremony and about how the Council managed her complaint. The Council was at fault. There were service failures during Ms X's ceremony and the Council did not properly manage Ms X's complaint. This caused Ms X distress and frustration. The Council has already made service improvements to prevent the recurrence of fault. It will also pay Ms X £200 to acknowledge the distress and frustration the faults caused her.
East Riding of Yorkshire Council (21 002 479)
Statement Not upheld Other 24-Nov-2021
Summary: Mr X complained the Council has wrongly and unfairly determined he is not suitable to undertake contracts with its Transportation Service, causing him financial loss and damaging his reputation. He also complains the process has taken an unnecessarily long period of time and placed himself and his family under undue stress. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council investigated the allegations against Mr X or in reaching the decision that Mr X is not suitable to undertake Transportation Services contracts.
Nottinghamshire County Council (21 001 571)
Statement Upheld Other 15-Nov-2021
Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council's conduct of a safeguarding investigation. There is no fault in how the Council involved Mrs X in the investigation or shared Mrs X's personal data. There is fault in the Council's failure to consider relevant evidence. The Council also delayed sending Mrs X minutes of a safeguarding meeting and took too long to complete the investigation. This is fault. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Mrs X £250 and review its findings.
Leicester City Council (20 003 297)
Statement Upheld Other 28-Oct-2021
Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council administered the purchase of his former Council house. He said the Council wrongly assigned the house next door to him with the Land Registry, as well as the house he bought. The Council accepted fault for its part in the conveyancing error and offered a suitable remedy. The Ombudsman did not find fault with the way the Council tried to correct its error.
London Borough of Wandsworth (20 011 642)
Statement Upheld Other 27-Oct-2021
Summary: The Council did not lead Miss X to expect it would find her employment and so is not at fault. The Council is at fault for failing to make reasonable adjustments to how it communicated with Miss X. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Miss X £200, and take action to improve its service.
Cheshire West & Chester Council (21 001 276)
Statement Upheld Other 27-Oct-2021
Summary: Mr X complained the Council has unfairly extended contact restrictions without the right to a review or appeal. Mr X said this called his honesty into question. We find the Council were at fault for not having a right of review against the decision to invoke the policy or restrictions applied, but this did not cause Mr X an injustice.
Statement Not upheld Other 21-Oct-2021
Summary:The complaint
Ms X complains the Council will not refund her the fee she paid to give notice of her marriage and the deposit for her wedding ceremony.
Ms X says the Council cancelled her wedding ceremony and she has lost out financially as she will have to pay a new notice of marriage fee
Kingston Upon Hull City Council (21 002 957)
Statement Upheld Other 17-Oct-2021
Summary: Mr X says the actions of the Coroner and the Coroner's office frustrated the investigative process into the cause of death of his mother. The complaint was closed because the injustice caused to Mr X is not so great that the Ombudsman would recommend a remedy.
East Sussex Fire Authority (20 014 016)
Statement Not upheld Other 30-Sep-2021
Summary: Mr B complained about the Authority's decision not to prosecute anyone in connection with a fire that destroyed the block of flats where he lived. He considered the Authority had not provided a clear explanation of how it reached the decision and the basis for it. He considered the failure to take such action meant that he, and the other affected residents, felt the trauma they went through had not been taken seriously. And the wider public interest of holding the relevant bodies to account had not been served. There was no fault by the Authority.
London Borough of Southwark (21 005 149)
Statement Upheld Other 26-Sep-2021
Summary: Mr X complains the Council banned him from several forums and is withholding information he has asked for. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council has agreed to carry out the overdue review of the ban which is a suitable remedy to this part of the complaint. It is reasonable for Mr X to complain to the Information Commissioner's Office about access to information.