Stroud District Council
Complaint overview
Between 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, we dealt with 14 complaints. Of these, 8 were not for us or not ready for us to investigate. We assessed and closed 5 complaints. We investigated 1 complaints.
More about this data
Complaints dealt with – the total number of complaints and enquiries considered. It is not appropriate to investigate all of them.
Not for us – includes complaints brought to us before the council was given chance to consider it, or the complainant came to the wrong Ombudsman.
Assessed and closed – includes complaints where the law says we’re not allowed to investigate, or it would be a poor use of public funds if we did.
Investigated – we completed an investigation and made a decision on whether we found fault, or no fault.
Complaints upheld – we completed an investigation and found evidence of fault, or the organisation provided a suitable remedy early on.
Satisfactory remedies provided by the Council – the council upheld the complaint and we agreed with how it offered to put things right.
Compliance with Ombudsman recommendations – not complying with our recommendations is rare. A council with a compliance rate below 100% should scrutinise the complaints where it failed to comply and identify any learning.
Average performance rates – we compare the annual statistics of similar types of councils to work out an average level of performance. We do this for County Councils, District Councils, Metropolitan Boroughs, Unitary Councils, and London Boroughs.
For more information on understanding our statistics see Interpreting our complaints data.
Complaints dealt with
Not for us
Assessed and closed
Investigated
-
Complaints upheld
We investigated 1 complaints and upheld 1.
100% of complaints we investigated were upheld.
This compares to an average of 66% in similar authorities.
View upheld decisionsAdjusted for Stroud District Council's population, this is 0.8 upheld decisions per 100,000 residents.
The average for authorities of this type is
1.1 upheld decisions per 100,000 residents. -
Satisfactory remedies provided by the Council
In 0 out of 1 upheld cases we found the Council had provided a satisfactory remedy before the complaint reached the Ombudsman.
0% satisfactory remedy rate.
This compares to an average of 15% in similar authorities.
-
Compliance with Ombudsman recommendations
We recorded compliance outcomes in 1 cases.
In 1 cases we were satisfied with the actions taken.100% compliance rate with recommendations.
This compares to an average of 100% in similar authorities.
Annual letters
We write to councils each year to give a summary of the complaint statistics we record about them,
and their performance in responding to our investigations.
Reports
The Ombudsman has published the following reports against Stroud District Council
Find out more about reports
We issue reports on certain investigations, particularly where there is a wider public interest to do so. Common reasons for reports are significant injustice, systemic issues, major learning points and non-compliance with our recommendations. Issuing reports is one way we help to ensure councils are accountable to local people and highlighting the learning from complaints helps to improve services for everybody. Reports are published for 10 years.
No reports published
Service improvements
The Council has agreed to make the following improvements to its services following an Ombudsman investigation.
Find out more about service improvements
When we find fault, we can recommend improvements to systems and processes where they haven’t worked properly, so that others do not suffer from these same problems in future. Common examples are policy changes; procedural reviews; and staff training. Service improvements from decisions are published for 5 years and those from reports are published for 10 years.
The latest 10 cases are listed below – click ‘view all’ to find all service improvements.
Case reference: 24 012 234
Category: Planning
Sub Category: Enforcement
- The Council agreed to provide a suitable briefing or training to its planning staff on the Council’s complaints process, including how complaints should be recorded and responded to, and the relevant timescales.
- The Council agreed to develop a written action plan, with measurable outcomes and timescales, to address its backlog of planning enforcement complaints.
Case reference: 23 009 330
Category: Planning
Sub Category: Enforcement
- The Council should review its guidance and produce a briefing note for officers to reflect the need to consider the implications of under-enforcement of planning conditions and the Council’s long-term ability to control development as it intended when it originally imposed those conditions.
Case reference: 20 012 746
Category: Environment and regulation
Sub Category: Antisocial behaviour
- the Council has also agreed to make the following service improvement: review its ASB Policy and guidance to staff to include clear directions to staff on how its environmental health team and tenant services team will work together in ASB and noise nuisance cases against Council tenants and leaseholders. This should include clear information on when one team needs to take the lead role and when a single point of contact should be established.
- The Council has also agreed to make the following service improvement: issue a reminder to officers of when they should draw up an Action Plan when they receive complaints about ASB by Council tenants and leaseholders
- the Council has also agreed to make the following service improvement: remind officers who investigate complaints at the final stage of the complaints procedure that complainants who are not Council tenants or leaseholders cannot complain to the Housing Ombudsman Service. If they are complaining about the Council’s use of its ASB powers, we may be able to investigate.
Last updated: 4 April 2015