Recent statements in this category are shown below:
Statement Upheld Other 13-Nov-2020
Summary: Mr X complained the Council took two of his cars it thought he had abandoned. Mr X says he managed to collect one car from the Council but it had already destroyed the second car. The Council has acknowledged it should not have destroyed the second car before Mr X had a chance to review the contents. The Council offered £100 for the injustice of Mr X's lost opportunity to collect the second car and items inside. The Ombudsman considers this offer is suitable to reflect the Council's fault and the injustice caused.
Statement Upheld Other 11-Nov-2020
Summary: Mr Y complains the Council did not properly consider his application for two dropped kerbs. He says the Council delayed in referring his application to the correct committee. The Ombudsman finds fault in how the Council handled Mr Y's application and for a lack of clarity in its policy.
Statement Upheld Other 16-Oct-2020
Summary: Mr X and Ms Y complain about how the Council handled their reports of water coming from a neighbouring property onto the highway and causing damage. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault for not telling Mr X and Ms Y about its decision not to take enforcement action against their neighbour. The Council is also at fault for failing to keep Mr X and Ms Y updated about its discussions with their neighbour following their further reports and complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and Ms Y and pay them £250 to recognise the time and trouble spent pursuing their complaint.
Statement Upheld Other 29-Sep-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a Freedom Pass. This is because the Authority has offered a fair response and the Ombudsman cannot achieve the outcome the complainant wants.
Statement Not upheld Other 15-Sep-2020
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council's decision to decline his dropped kerb application. The Council declined the application as the proposed dropped kerb was within 10 metres of an existing junction and considered unsafe. Mr X says the Council did not have any policy which stated this. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council's decision.
Statement Not upheld Other 11-Sep-2020
Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council's Highways Authority officers acted when asked to advise a local planning authority about his planning application. Mr X said he suffered financial loss because of lost business. There was no fault in the way the Council acted.
Statement Upheld Other 11-Sep-2020
Summary: The Council made some administrative errors, which led to delays in the construction of a vehicle crossover. The Council has refunded the complainant's inspection fee in recognition of this, but upon recommendation by the Ombudsman considers, it has agreed to offer a small additional amount to remedy the injustice here.
Statement Not upheld Other 10-Sep-2020
Summary: In refusing Mrs B's application for a dropped kerb, the Council properly applied its policy and explained its decision-making. Because of this, we cannot question the decision itself.
Statement Not upheld Other 03-Sep-2020
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council's involvement as highways consultee and its assessment of the as-built scheme. Mr X says the works have caused serious highway safety issues. The County Council provided its professional judgement on the as-built scheme to the Borough Council. There is no evidence of fault.
Statement Upheld Other 18-Aug-2020
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to carry out its duties to prevent traffic disruption caused by an event at a local school. The Ombudsman has found no fault by the Council in how it reached its decision. However, the Council is at fault for failing to take actions it promised Mr X it would. The Council has agreed to speak with the School at the start of the next academic year about the traffic disruption. .