Other


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Suffolk County Council (26 016 553)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 20-Sep-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to take action over a neighbour’s enclosure of highway land within his property boundary. There is insufficient evidence of any personal injustice to Mr X which would warrant an investigation.

  • Cornwall Council (26 016 171)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 17-Sep-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about damage caused to his car by a Council officer. Only the courts can decide liability for the damage, so it is reasonable for Mr X to take the matter to court. For the remainder, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures when we decide not to deal with the substantive matter.

  • Birmingham City Council (26 016 049)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 16-Sep-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the enforcement of a Penalty Charge Notice. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to seek to regain his appeal rights, and then to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

  • City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (26 016 062)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 16-Sep-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to grant a clean air zone exemption. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making to justify an investigation, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

  • London Borough of Bromley (26 016 053)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 09-Sep-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council installing bollards on the grass verge outside his home. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

  • London Borough of Merton (25 008 446)

    Statement Upheld Other 08-Sep-2026

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not properly consult residents and give them the chance to object to a new Cycle Hire Only on-street parking bay opposite his home. We did not find fault in the Council’s consultation. However, the Council was at fault for its lack of positive, timely action addressing nuisance and obstruction caused by e-bike operators. The Council agreed to provide Mr X a symbolic financial remedy for the distress this caused.

  • Bath and North East Somerset Council (26 015 034)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 08-Sep-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled a complaint about a Clean Air Zone charge. This is because we have decided any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement and it is not a good use of resources to investigate complaint handling in isolation.

  • Worcestershire County Council (26 012 829)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 07-Sep-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council handled her concerns about a tree near her property. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating.

  • London Borough of Croydon (25 011 229)

    Statement Upheld Other 03-Sep-2026

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council will not provide her with a dedicated disabled parking bay for her child. She also complained the disabled bay installed near her home was not big enough and it took too long for the Council to lengthen it. We found fault by the Council on all parts of Mrs X’s complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise, make Mrs X a payment in recognition of the inconvenience and uncertainty caused to her and reconsider her request for a dedicated disabled parking bay.

  • London Borough of Wandsworth (26 014 705)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 02-Sep-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council removing and disposing of his motorcycle security chains. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to go to court to seek reimbursement for the cost of replacement motorcycle chains.

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.

Privacy settings