Decision search
Your search has 53192 results
-
Manchester City Council (25 004 524)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 29-Jul-2025
Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about a bus lane contravention. This is because the matter has been considered in court. Nor will we investigate a complaint about enforcement action, because that is a late complaint and there are no good reasons why it could not have been made sooner.
-
Liverpool City Council (25 008 009)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 28-Jul-2025
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s enforcement of a bus gate penalty charge notice as Mr X used his right to ask the court to consider his case and so this matter is no longer therefore within our remit.
-
Worcestershire County Council (25 008 301)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Highway repair and maintenance 28-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that her car was damaged by a pothole. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs B to pursue her compensation claim at court.
-
Torridge District Council (24 014 115)
Statement Not upheld Enforcement 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr J complained about the Council’s handling of planning applications and planning enforcement relating to the use and works at a neighbouring farm. He said as a result he had experienced distress and an impact on residential amenity. We found no fault, or not enough evidence of fault, in how the Council reached its decision it was not proportionate or expedient to take any action. We could not consider Mr J’s concerns about its decisions on planning applications and statutory nuisances as these had been subject to legal action.
-
London Borough of Harrow (24 012 792)
Statement Upheld Looked after children 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Miss Y complains the Council did not properly investigate the injuries her child obtained whilst in Council arranged foster care. We find procedural fault which creates uncertainty about the Council’s consideration of the injuries. The Council will pay £500 in recognition of that distress and remind staff of the protocols when considering allegations made against those working with children.
-
Essex County Council (24 013 349)
Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of his mother Miss Y about how the Council charged for a temporary care home, made her sign a document, managed her money, and decided to apply to the Court of Protection for deputyship. He said this caused Miss Y distress. We do not find the Council at fault.
-
Rother District Council (24 015 328)
Statement Upheld Enforcement 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not follow due process to investigate alleged planning breaches at a neighbouring residential site. He says the Council failed to take appropriate enforcement action. Mr X says the Council’s actions negatively impacted his family’s mental health and caused avoidable stress. We found fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and has agreed to make service improvements.
-
Isle of Wight Council (24 015 465)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council placing him in unsuitable interim accommodation. He also complained that it would not offer him interim accommodation until he rehoused his emotional support dog and that a housing officer was rude and dismissive towards him. We found fault by the Council on all matters. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X and make him symbolic payments in recognition of the injustice caused to him.
-
Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (24 016 820)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 28-Jul-2025
Summary: The Council was at fault for poor communication and delays in Mr X’s homeless application. Mr X experienced avoidable distress and financial loss as a result. The Council has agreed to apologise and make payments to Mr X.
-
London Borough of Waltham Forest (24 016 996)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed acting on his homelessness application and he and his family were placed in unsuitable temporary accommodation. We found there were delays in acting on his application and Mr X’s family were placed in unsuitable bed and breakfast accommodation for 35 weeks longer than appropriate. We recommended an apology and a payment to recognise the impact of this.