Annex 4

LGSCO Ref	Directorate	Service Area	Date of Final Decision	Outcome	Summary of Final Decision	Actions (as list with dates for completion)	Actions completed
20013136	CCS	Council Tax	20/04/2021	Closed after initial enquiries - No further action	Ms X complains that the Council unfairly issued a summons for unpaid council tax to her. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient injustice to warrant investigation.		NA
21003277	EAP	Waste	18/06/2021	Closed after initial enquiries - No further action	We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about bin collections, because the injustice she claims is not serious enough to warrant our involvement and the use of public money.		NA
21003630	EAP	Waste	18/06/2021	Closed after initial enquiries - No further action	We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about bin collections, because the injustice she claims is not serious enough to warrant our involvement and the use of public money		NA
20004974	EAP	Planning	19/05/2021	upheld maladministration and injustice	Mr D complains about a lack of planning enforcement action regarding noisy building works occurring outside permitted hours. The Ombudsman has found some evidence of fault by the Council because it has delayed issuing a formal decision to Mr D. He has upheld the complaint and completed the investigation. The Council agrees to the apologise and write to Mr D	• Send Mr D a letter of apology. – I would advise that you issue this as soon as possible.	Yes
						• If the Council is ready to make a formal decision on the case it should write to Mr D explaining how that view was reached
						• The Council should also ensure it documents its decision-making process when deciding to close a case (for example a contemporaneous note if the decision arises from a group discussion).
						The Council should carry out these actions within four weeks of this case closing.
20008854	EAP	High - ways	19/05/2021	Highways & Transport and the decision as: Upheld: maladministration and injustice	Mr B complains he missed out on superfast broadband because the Council’s road adoption information was not accurate. We find fault with the Council for failing to update its records. The Council agreed actions to remedy the injustice to Mr B	Within one month of my final decision (18th of June 2021)  the Council agrees to:	Yes for those to be completed by 18 June 2021. Others being progressed
						• Apologise to Mr B for the faults identified in this statement.
						• Pay Mr B £300 to acknowledge the lost opportunity and avoidable time, trouble and inconvenience it caused him.
						• Provide evidence Mr B’s address information is correctly updated on both the Council’s road adoption system.
						• Provide evidence it has informed Geoplace of the correct information in respect of Mr B’s address.
						Within three months (19th of August) of my decision the Council agrees to:
						• Complete a review of its road adoption system. The review should consider how it is kept up to date and accurate.
						• Within one month of completing the review report the findings to Councillors and seek approval for changes and recommendations.
						• Within two weeks of the Councillors decision write to Mr B and explain what action it will take and what the timeframe will be for completion.
						• Provide the Ombudsman with a copy of the review report, agreed actions and timeframe for completion.
19010970	HHASC	Housing management	22/04/2021	Upheld: maladministration and injustice	The Ombudsman found fault by the Council on Miss Q’s complaint about its failure to protect her as a vulnerable person from 2 tenants it moved close to her after it had moved her away from them. It failed to: consider exercising discretion to prevent their move; warn her of the move; show contact with the police or tenants. When moving her again, it failed to weigh its duty of confidentiality to her new abusive neighbour against her need to make an informed decision about whether to accept the tenancy. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.	The Council agreed to take the following action to remedy the injustice identified within 4 weeks of the final decision on this complaint: • Apologise to Miss Q for: the shortcoming of its systems; its failure to consider whether it needed to exercise discretion to prevent their move; failing to be more proactive; failing to show it balanced the need to keep the perpetrators confidentiality against her need to be told and make an informed choice; failing to show contact with the police; • It should pay her £1,500 for the avoidable distress the failures caused. This includes the anxiety Miss Q suffered, the upset, the upheaval, the frustration, the inconvenience, and the impact on her mental health; and • Pay a contribution of £1,293.60 towards the overall cost Miss Q incurred when moving and preparing her home.	Yes – where we have had satisfactory receipts.  The review is ongoing for the 3 month deadline.
						The Council also agreed, within 4 weeks of the Miss Q moving in to her new accommodation, to do the following:
						• It should pay her an additional £250 for the avoidable distress the failures caused which have resulted in her having to move from property 3 to another property;
						• It agreed with Miss Q that it will remove the existing carpets in the property and fit new ones;
						• It will pay a contribution towards the redecoration costs of the new property up to a maximum payment of £1,000, subject to her providing satisfactory receipts, and will try to arrange for a community-based organisation to do the work
						• It will also provide her with a ‘paint pack’ which includes paints and brushes, for example, sufficient for a 2-bedroom property;
						• It will pay a contribution towards her moving costs up to a maximum of £150 subject to her providing satisfactory receipts; and
						• It will pay up to £1,200 for any improvement works Miss Q wishes to carry out to the existing fence, which already meets its empty property standard, subject to her providing satisfactory receipts.
						Final decision - In addition to the above requirements, the Council also agreed, within three months of the date of this decision, to carry out a review of its policies and procedures to improve: • its systems and procedures to identify potential problems of perpetrators moving close to their victims; its consideration of discretion to prevent moves involving perpetrators who might end up living near their victims; its ability to be its ability to be more proactive when known perpetrators do end up living close to victims; its more proactive when known perpetrators do end up living close to victims; its record keeping; its investigation of reports of harassment; its consideration of discretion when rehousing applicants next door to tenants with violence and behavioural issues; its consideration of human rights
20009245	Place	Housing registrations	21/06/2021	Upheld: Maladministration & Injustice	Miss X complained about the way the Council handled her homelessness applications, the cost of emergency accommodation provided during the COVID-19 pandemic and its housing register decision. The Council was at fault for not reviewing its housing register decision when Miss X provided further information in February 2020. It should apologise and carry out a review of that decision.	The Council will, within one month of the date of the final decision:	Ongoing – as of date of writing this report is before deadline
						• apologise for not treating Miss X’s complaint in February 2020 as a request for a review of its housing register decision; and
						• offer Miss X a further opportunity to submit any further information in support of her housing register application.
						The Council will, within three months of the date of the final decision:
						• review its housing register decision and write to Miss X with the outcome and its reasons;
						• remind relevant staff to provide clear information in housing register decision
						letters about how to request a review of the decision; and
						• remind relevant staff to consider whether a complaint should actually be treated as a request for a review of a housing decision so the Council can respond appropriately.