Resolved, no recommendations
-
Case ref:
-
Date:
-
Body:
The City of Edinburgh Council
-
Sector:
-
Outcome:
Resolved, no recommendations
-
Subject:
policy/administration
Summary
Mr C complained that the council did not provide him with a reasonable standard of customer service when they failed to respond to his request for a copy of his marriage certificate in a reasonable timescale or, on two separate occasions, pay the postage on mail they sent to him. Mr C told us that the outcome he was seeking from pursuing his complaint was payment of his expenses.
When we raised Mr Cs complaint with the council, they apologised for the unfortunate series of events that had resulted in Mr Cs request not being dealt with properly, and failure to pay postage. To resolve the complaint, the council told us that the mail service was being reviewed as part of their service improvement programme. They also explained that staff had been reminded of the importance of ensuring that all items were appropriately stamped. As a remedy, the council offered a payment partly to cover his expenses and partly as a goodwill gesture. Mr C was satisfied with this, and we did not issue a decision on the case as it was resolved.
-
Case ref:
-
Date:
-
Body:
-
Sector:
-
Outcome:
Resolved, no recommendations
-
Subject:
incorrect billing
Summary
Mr C owns a holiday home complex, which has a main water storage tank, and individual tanks serving the accommodation. There was a leak, which was Mr C's responsibility to have repaired. However, when he was billed, Business Stream did not take into account that his premises were served with a soakaway (a gravel-filled channel or pit that helps manage surface water) and did not apply a leak allowance.
After we got in touch with Business Stream, they took action to investigate, and told us that if it was confirmed that there was a soakaway, they would amend Mr C's account. Mr C was satisfied with this as a resolution to his complaint.
Summary
Mr C complained that, although his business should have had a water meter fitted in 2009, Business Stream did not fit one, which meant that his bills were higher than they would otherwise have been. He had taken the matter up with the company over the years, but they never acknowledged the fault.
When we approached Business Stream, they reviewed the complaint and realised that they had been in error in not fitting the meter. They credited Mr C's account with the sum they calculated he had overpaid over the years.
-
Case ref:
-
Date:
-
Body:
-
Sector:
-
Outcome:
Resolved, no recommendations
-
Subject:
policy / administration
Summary
Mr C complained that Business Stream's handling of his requests for water connections at the business park he owned had not been reasonable. He said that he had faced delays in having some of the units at the business park connected for water. In addition, he considered that Business Stream had not calculated the charges for the connections correctly.
When we discussed Mr C's complaint with him, he said that that there were two things that he wanted to achieve from it. He wanted a final connection at the business park to be completed, and confirmation that the charges made by Business Stream for the connections were correct.
Mr C subsequently confirmed that the final connection at the business park had been completed. We also discussed with him the information we had received from Business Stream about how the charges had been calculated. Mr C confirmed that he no longer wanted to pursue this matter. He confirmed that his complaint had been resolved and that he was happy for it to be closed.