Resolved, no recommendations

Summary

Ms C complained to us about a meeting that the council had held about her son. She said that the minutes of the meeting were inaccurate and she wanted them to be destroyed.

During our investigation, the council told us that they had destroyed the minutes and that the only copies that now remained were held by us and their complaints team. They also confirmed that the minutes had not been sent to Ms C's son's new school. When we discussed this with Ms C, she confirmed that this resolved her complaint and, in view of this, we closed her case.

Summary

Mr C is self employed, running a small business from premises next to his home. He complained that Business Stream pursued him for charges for water and waste water services, despite his business premises having no water or sewerage facilities.

Summary

Mr C is self-employed, running a small business from premises next to his home. He complained that Business Stream pursued him for charges for water and waste water services, despite his business premises having no water or sewerage facilities.

We did not issue a finding on this complaint as it was resolved to Mr C's satisfaction following a review of their previous position by the water authorities concerned.

Summary

Mr C complained about business water charges for his workshop. His workshop was located on the grounds of his domestic property, with no water services connected, and Mr C did not use water in his business. Mr C said he was already paying for the water to his domestic property through council tax, and should not be liable for separate water charges for his business, which did not use water. We discussed Mr C's complaint with Scottish Water and Business Stream, who agreed to cancel the charges. As the issue was resolved by the authority, we did not make a decision on this complaint.

Summary

Ms C complained to us that Business Stream had unreasonably billed her for water charges for a property that was vacant. Ms C had subsequently sold the property. In response to our enquiries on the complaint, Business Stream said that after considering the circumstances of the case, they would be willing to close Ms C's account and withdraw all charges. Ms C confirmed that this resolved her complaint and, consequently, we closed the case.

Summary

Miss C was a student at the university, studying towards a PhD. She did not pass her PhD and appealed against the decision of the examiners. This appeal, and Miss C's subsequent formal complaint to the university, were not upheld. Miss C felt that the university had failed to take account of their own policies and procedural guidelines when reaching their decision.

We did not issue a finding on this case as it was resolved to Miss C’s satisfaction, following a review by the university of their previous position.

Summary

Mr C complained that the council had failed to take reasonable steps to repair his boiler. In particular, Mr C said he had contacted the council's gas engineers several times but each time they came out to repair the identified fault, the boiler would break down again. The evidence available confirmed that each time Mr C reported a fault with his boiler, an engineer would attend to repair it in line with the council's timescales. Therefore, it appeared that the council's gas engineers were attending to Mr C's boiler and carrying out repairs in line with the relevant procedure.

However, in light of the time and trouble experienced by Mr C, we asked the council to consider arranging for an independent inspection of the boiler in an effort to identify whether it was in fact fit for purpose and functioning properly. We also asked the council to consider making a payment to Mr C as a goodwill gesture. The council agreed to both requests and Mr C considered his complaint resolved.

Summary

Ms C was unhappy with the works that were carried out in her home in response to the high levels of damp and mould throughout. It was agreed with Ms C and the council for remedial works to be carried out and a dehumidifier installed with the running costs reimbursed. We closed the file and took no further action.

Summary

Mrs C complained to the council that errors made in their planning procedures resulted in her loss of privacy when a boundary fence was not erected on the new development site next to her home as stated in the original plans and conditions. The council acknowledged the errors and waived the planning application fee so that Mrs C could raise the height of her own boundary wall. When she complained that she would be faced with the considerable cost of heightening her boundary to secure her privacy, the council had said they had done all they could and could not go back on a signed-off document. When we notified the council of our investigation, the council then referred Mrs C's case to their insurers and asked her to make a claim. With this attempt to consider financial redress, we closed our investigation.

Summary

Ms C complained that the council had failed to act on her reports of repairs required to her home. During our investigation, we found that there had been a breakdown in communication which had resulted in repairs she had reported not being attended to. The council apologised sincerely to Ms C and made arrangements to carry out all the outstanding matters. Ms C confirmed to us that the council were taking action to resolve her complaint.