Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Transport for London (18 007 596)

    Statement Upheld Other 15-Feb-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains the Authority has failed to maintain an area of land near his home which has resulted in a vermin problem. There was some fault by the Authority because it did not maintain the land as scheduled in 2018. The Authority has agreed to make a payment to Mr B to put right the injustice he suffered. So, we have completed our investigation.

  • Hertfordshire County Council (18 010 246)

    Statement Upheld Other 11-Feb-2019

    Summary: Mr D complains the Council delayed works to a dropped kerb in 2017. The Ombudsman has found evidence of fault, including delay, by the Council. He has upheld the complaint and completed the investigation because the Council agrees to the recommended actions including paying Mr D financial redress.

  • Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (18 010 467)

    Statement Upheld Other 05-Feb-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman found fault on Mrs W's complaint against the Council. Officers communicated poorly with her. It delayed the investigation of her concerns and complaint. It failed to provide evidence showing how it investigated and assessed her concerns. It failed to show it carried out action it implied it would take. It also failed to provide her with a fully reasoned decision. Its response to Ombudsman's enquiries was also poor. The agreed action remedies the injustice the fault caused.

  • Surrey County Council (18 003 917)

    Statement Upheld Other 04-Feb-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to honour an agreement to carry out works to an existing vehicle crossover outside of his and his neighbour's property. The Council acknowledged it failed to advise Mr X there was a time limit to accept the agreement. To remedy the injustice caused to Mr X, the Council has agreed to honour its original offer.

  • Staffordshire County Council (18 006 231)

    Statement Upheld Other 30-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains about bollards the Council installed on his neighbour's grass verge, the different reasons it gave him for their installation, and highway repairs done in nearby roads. Mr X considers the bollards and repairs cause him an injustice because the Council has not agreed to put bollards outside his house, or do works to his roads. These matters do not cause Mr X a significant personal injustice. During his dealings with the Council, officers restricted Mr X's communications. They did this with fault, causing Mr X injustice requiring a remedy.

  • Hertfordshire County Council (18 007 119)

    Statement Upheld Other 30-Jan-2019

    Summary: The Council has properly assessed the standard of work of a vehicle crossover, and works required to resolve pooling water on the highway. The Council delayed progressing this case, and failed to tell Mr C when it will complete the drainage works. The Council will apologise and provide a timescale of the works.

  • Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (18 010 496)

    Statement Not upheld Other 28-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains about the actions of the Council after he arranged for it to install a dropped kerb outside his home. The Ombudsman's view is that it would be reasonable for Mr B to exercise his right to go to court to seek a remedy for the most significant parts of his complaint, and to complain to the Information Commissioner about his data protection complaint. There are no good grounds to pursue any remaining matters further.

  • Staffordshire County Council (18 009 747)

    Statement Not upheld Other 25-Jan-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman found no fault by the Council on Mr Z's complaint about delay sending his claim for damage to his vehicle from a pothole to its insurers. While the Council missed its own 3-month deadline for reaching a decision on the claim, the extra few weeks it took were not significant enough in these circumstances to amount to fault or cause an injustice. Nor was it fault to decline to progress his complaint before the 3-month deadline.

  • London Borough of Enfield (17 016 092)

    Statement Upheld Other 21-Jan-2019

    Summary: Ms X complains the Council has not considered her applications for a vehicle crossover and tree removal in accordance with its policies and guidance. The Council is at fault for delays in processing her applications however, we consider it has appropriately remedied any injustice this may have caused. There is no fault in the way the Council arrived at its decision to refuse Ms X's applications.

  • Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (18 005 633)

    Statement Not upheld Other 21-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council has failed to take appropriate action to reduce anti-social behaviour on a footpath near his home. The Council responded to Mr X's complaint and instructed officers to patrol the area. It also explained why it could not take other action requested by Mr X. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council responded to Mr X's complaints though it is noted he remains dissatisfied with the action taken.