Lincolnshire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council responded to Mr X’s information request. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider this complaint.
Source · Ombudsman decisions
LGO Individual Decisions
40,244 total decisions
13,353 investigated
10,886 upheld
82% upheld of investigated
Years: Jan 2022–Sep 2026
40,244 published decisions from the Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman. The Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman investigates complaints about councils and registered social care providers in England. Source: lgo.org.uk.
Decisions
London Borough of Hounslow
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of works completed to a shared driveway because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify our involvement.
Derby City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X's Blue Badge application because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered his application, appeal and complaints to justify an investigation
London Borough of Waltham Forest
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision about the complainant’s housing benefit entitlement. This is because most of the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate. In any case it was reasonable to expect the complainant to …
Watford Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of the complainant’s parking permit. Part of the complaint is late. For the more recent events, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating. And, we cannot achieve the …
North West Leicestershire District Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his business rates account. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault and Mr X has appealed to the Valuation Office.
Somerset Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to award him a discretionary housing payment. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.
London Borough of Haringey
Summary: We will not investigate Ms Y’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her Council Tax account. We could add nothing further to the Council’s response and an investigation would unlikely achieve anything more for Ms Y.
Brighton & Hove City Council
Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about Penalty Charge Notices. Miss X has appealed to Traffic Penalty Tribunal, which places the matter outside our remit.
Transport for London
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Authority’s failure to issue a congestion charge refund. The Authority has since apologised for the delay and issued a refund to Mr X. There is nothing more we could achieve for Mr X by investigating …
Leicester City Council
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council sending her an anti-social behaviour advice letter about bread and bird seed. This is because we have decided any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
Lancashire County Council
Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s actions linked to her son’s education. We found fault because the Council failed to provide adequate education to Y after he had been excluded from school. This caused Miss X avoidable distress, frustration and uncertainty and meant Y …
London Borough of Haringey
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that a Councillor failed to respond when he complained about the Council’s handling of his request for bereavement services and his subject access request. That is because the injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.
Test Valley Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint about delays in enforcement action being taken against his neighbour because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify our involvement.
London Borough of Bexley
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Council considering Mr X’s request for a council tax reduction. Mr X has a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal, and it would be reasonable to expect him to use it.
London Borough of Merton
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a council tax direct debit. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to properly investigate his exclusion from a leisure facility. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify our involvement.
Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with his building control concerns about his neighbour’s home. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.
London Borough of Islington
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about data protection this is because the Information Commission is better place to consider complaints about data protection.
London Borough of Southwark
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify our involvement, and there is insufficient evidence of Mr Y suffering significant personal injustice.
Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council's involvement with his family following safeguarding concerns in 2024. The complaint is late and there is no good reason for us to consider it now.
Medway Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to penalise Mr X for an unlicensed House of Multiple Occupation. Mr X had a right of appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal, and it would have been reasonable for him to use it.
Reading Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that he is not homeless or threatened with homelessness. This is because it was reasonable for him to ask the Council for a review.
Somerset Council
Summary: We found fault with the Council for restricting access of post-19 learners to travel assistance to their first course of study. We also found fault with the Council failing to consider whether travel assistance was necessary for Mr Y. The Council agreed to update …
Somerset Council
Summary: We found fault with the Council limiting provision of transport to post-16 children based on whether a pre-existing route exists and has capacity, rather than considering the needs of the applicant. We also found fault with the Council not considering affordability when considering Personal …