Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Havering (19 014 382)

    Statement Upheld Other 10-Jul-2020

    Summary: Mrs B complains the Council refused her application for a dropped kerb. Mrs B says this caused her inconvenience because she cannot park outside her house. The Council was at fault because its terms and conditions for a dropped kerb were not comprehensive. The Council remedied the injustice caused by this fault during its complaints procedure.

  • East Sussex County Council (19 006 599)

    Statement Upheld Other 22-Jun-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council unreasonably enlarged the extent of the highway and failed to properly respond to his queries and reports. We found no fault in the approach the Council took when deciding the extent of the highway. However, there was a failure to follow up reports about unauthorised highway work. There was also some fault in the records kept by the Council. The Council should apologise and review its record keeping procedures.

  • London Borough of Havering (19 011 937)

    Statement Upheld Other 26-May-2020

    Summary: Miss X said the Council confiscated and retained her father's blue badge. She said this caused him inconvenience and distress. There was fault with the Council's actions and it has agreed with our recommendations to remedy Miss X and her father's injustice.

  • Essex County Council (19 005 725)

    Statement Upheld Other 10-Mar-2020

    Summary: Miss X complained the Council approved and then changed its mind to reject her application for a dropped kerb causing her to spend £5,250 on a contractor for works that could not then be carried out. The Council was at fault for how it handled her application, causing Miss X an injustice. However, its apology and offer to refund her application fee are appropriate remedies. Miss X chose to pay the contractor up front in cash for the work on a non-refundable basis. The Council was entitled to decide the evidence she has provided for this spend is not adequate to permit it to pay her the £5,250 she claims. Its offer to discuss the invoice with the contractor, once Miss X gives it permission is appropriate.

  • Hampshire County Council (19 004 597)

    Statement Not upheld Other 09-Mar-2020

    Summary: Solicitors complained on behalf of Mr X about the way the Council has handled an issue of highway rights. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council's main decision-making and it is unlikely investigation of related issues will lead to a different outcome for Mr X.

  • Isle of Wight Council (19 010 348)

    Statement Not upheld Other 21-Feb-2020

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council's failure to provide accessibility for disabled people within its footway network. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the way the Council considered the accessibility of its footway network.

  • Leeds City Council (19 008 069)

    Statement Upheld Other 17-Feb-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council's decision to close the road where she lives. There was no fault in the way the Council introduced a temporary Traffic Regulation Order. There was some fault in the maintenance procedures of the site and in the Council's complaint response.

  • London Borough of Camden (19 016 980)

    Statement Upheld Other 14-Feb-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X's complaint about an injury she suffered from a fall on the public highway. This is because the Council has made an offer she is happy with. Even if this were not the case, an investigation by the Ombudsman would not be appropriate. This is because we cannot establish liability in personal injury claims.

  • London Borough of Enfield (19 001 612)

    Statement Not upheld Other 13-Feb-2020

    Summary: The Council was not at fault for refusing Mr B's application for a disabled parking space outside his mother's house. It acted in line with its policy and properly considered her individual circumstances, so I cannot question its decision.

  • South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (19 011 601)

    Statement Not upheld Other 13-Feb-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council's decision not to install road markings outside her house to prevent parking opposite it. The Council was not at fault.

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.