Annex 3
Ombudsman
Ref |
Summary of Final Decision |
Actions and date(s) for completion |
Date Actions Complete |
LGSCO
ref 22009413 |
We cannot investigate issues relating to the Council’s actions as landlord as such matters are outside our jurisdiction. |
NA |
NA |
LGSCO
ref 22010459 |
We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because the complainant has not suffered significant injustice |
NA |
NA |
LGSCO
ref 22009856 |
We will not investigate this complaint the Council failed to properly consider a planning application. Although the Council was at fault, that did not cause the complainant a significant injustice. |
NA |
NA |
LGSCO
ref 22000412 |
Ms C complained the Council has failed to set up the agreed Direct Payment to pay her for five hours a week of support with regards to her father’s care. We did not find fault with regards to the decision that a direct payment was no longer required to support Mr F with social outings, once he had gone into hospital. However, the Council failed to communicate clearly with Ms C about this. The Council has agreed to apologise for this. |
By 21/12/2022 1. Apologise to Ms C and pay her £200 for the distress she experienced. 2. The council accepted LGSCO recommendations. However, Ms C told the LGSCO she does not want the £200.
|
06/12/2022 |
Ombudsman
Ref |
Summary of Final Decision |
Actions and date(s) for completion |
Date Actions Complete |
LGSCO ref 22000366
Adult
Social Care & Integration/ Adults
Date
of Final decision - 21/11/2022 Decision - Upheld: Fault and Injustice |
The Council accepts there were delays in financial assessments and reviews of Ms K’s care, errors in the transport provision, and a failure to carry out a carers’ assessment. It has apologised and reinstated transport. It will reimburse Mr X’s costs for the transport he provided and offer carers’ assessments to Mr and Mrs X. There was no fault in the calculation of Ms K’s contribution towards the cost of her care, however, and no reason why the Council should waive the outstanding contribution. |
By 21/12/2022 1. Reimburse Mr X for the cost of the journeys undertaken
2.
Pay
£250 in recognition of the time taken by Mr X to provide
transport.
3.
Offer
a carers assessment to both Mr and Mrs X. If there is a budgetary
consequence, backdate the payment of that for one year. 4. Pay £250 to Mr X for the time and trouble he was put to in making the complaint. |
13/01/2023 |
LGSCO
ref 22006869 |
The complaint is upheld. The Council fully acknowledge that it has failed to collect Mr L’s garden waste and provide a satisfactory service to him. This has caused Mr L frustration and uncertainty, as well as unnecessary time and trouble seeking a resolution. The Council has agreed to my recommendations to remedy the injustice Mr L has suffered. |
By 23/11/2022 1. Provide a fresh apology to Mr L for the fault and injustice identified. 2. Pay Mr L £100 to acknowledge the frustration and uncertainty he has suffered |
23/11/2022 |
PHSO
ref 22007335 |
Mr X complained about City of York Council (the Council) and York and Scarborough Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). Mr X complained about the way the Council and the Trust dealt with his late father, Mr Y’s, discharge from hospital and the Trust’s care of Mr Y while he was in hospital. We will not investigate the complaint because a coroner and a local Safeguarding Adults Board (SAB) are still investigating related issues. Mr X can resubmit his complaint to us for further consideration when the coroner and SAB have finished their investigations. |
NA |
NA |
LGSCO
ref 22010898
|
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council issued a penalty charge notice for parking in a restricted area. Mr X can reasonably use his right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. |
NA |
NA |
Ombudsman
Ref |
Summary of Final Decision |
Actions and date(s) for completion |
Date Actions Complete |
LGSCO
ref 22007505 Date of final decision - 30/11/2022
Decision
- Closed after initial enquiries |
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council granting planning permission and not taking enforcement action to address smoke and cooking odours from a food business near the complainant’s home. Parts of the complaint are late with no good reason to investigate now, the key matter of smoke and cooking odours has been resolved by the business moving, and there is otherwise not enough evidence of Council fault or of it causing significant injustice, so an investigation is not warranted. |
NA |
NA |
LGSCO
ref 22010219 |
We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about way the Council conducted a Best Interests Meeting for her son, Mr C, or the way it treated her. This is because further investigation could not add to the Council’s response or make a different finding of the kind Mrs B wants. |
NA |
NA |
LGSCO
ref 22006945 |
Mr X
complains the Council changed the parking permit |
NA |
NA |
LGSCO
ref 22011310 |
We
will not investigate this complaint about an |
NA |
NA |
LGSCO
ref 22011393 |
We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with matters relating to the adoption of a road outside the complainant’s property. This is because we have previously considered a complaint about the Council’s claim that the road was adopted. Other matters raised by the complainant are either made late or have been subject to the commencement of court proceedings. |
NA |
NA |
Ombudsman
Ref
|
Summary of Final Decision |
Actions and date(s) for completion |
Date Actions Complete |
LGSCO
ref 22005428 Date of final decision - 03/01/2023 Decision - Upheld: Fault and Injustice. |
Mrs X complained about the care provided to her daughter by the Council, delay with setting up direct payments, and its safeguarding investigations. There was fault with the Council not following part of its safeguarding policy but there was no injustice as the risk had been removed. We found fault as the Council did not meet her daughter’s needs consistently for a long period. It also delayed considering Mrs X’s needs as a carer. These faults caused Mrs X significant distress. There was delay in setting up direct payments which further caused uncertainty and frustration. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to remedy the injustice caused. |
By
the 3rd Feb 1. Apologise to Mrs X for the failure in being able to find consistent and sufficient care for Miss Y over the last 18 months 2. Pay Mrs X £1000 as a symbolic payment to recognise the significant distress caused to her and the time and trouble she has taken to deal with this complaint 3. Pay Mrs X £300 to acknowledge the delay in setting up direct payments, causing uncertainty and frustration
4.
and
If it has not already done so, ensure direct payments are securely
in place for Miss Y. 5. Issue reminders to appropriate staff to ensure they consider carrying out a carers assessment if it appears a carer may have any level of need for support 6. And Issue reminders to appropriate staff to ensure guidance and support is given when asked about direct payments and ensure proper consideration is given to these requests. |
1,2,3.5
complete |
LGSCO
ref 22013532 |
We
will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council |
NA |
NA |
LGSCO
ref 22012911 |
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has already taken satisfactory action to address the matter, and the injustice is not significant enough to justify our continued involvement in the case. |
NA |
NA |
Ombudsman
Ref
|
Summary of Final Decision |
Actions and date(s) for completion |
Date Actions Complete |
LGSCO
ref 22011939 |
We will not investigate this complaint about a failure to consult residents on proposed changes to the highway. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions and the complainant has not suffered sufficient personal injustice to justify an investigation. |
NA |
NA |
HOS
ref 202205506 [REF/LZ/YN/Xk/G3/] |
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident's reports about ongoing noise nuisance. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its decision to not allow the resident to move until they have lived in their property for 12 months. |
NA |
NA |
LGSCO
ref 22010403 |
The Council delayed replacing Mr B’s garden waste bin and failed to keep him up-to-date with what was happening. An apology and payment to Mr B is satisfactory remedy |
By
08/03/2023 2. pay him £30 |
ongoing |