Local Government

Overview

The complainant (Mr C) complained about the way Orkney Islands Council (the Council) handled his request to reimburse his (and his wife's) travel and accommodation expenses after he turned down a job with them.

Specific complaint and conclusion

The complaint which has been investigated is that the Council failed properly to handle Mr C's request to reimburse his travel and accommodation expenses after he turned down a job offer (upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Council reimburse Mr C's reasonable travel and accommodation expenses.  She also recommends that any correspondence sent to candidates calling them for interview either makes specific references to the circumstances when such expenses are not paid or, alternatively, refers to the enclosure, 'Interview Expenses'.

The Council have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

Overview

The complainant (Ms C) raised a number of concerns about the way in which the Loch Lomond and The Trossachs National Park Authority (the Park Authority) dealt with a planning application for a site adjoining her property.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  Ms C was unreasonably denied the opportunity to address the Planning Committee as she had requested and as she had been invited (not upheld);
• (b)  the Park Authority deliberately and consistently refused to accept the effects of the proposed development on Ms C's home (not upheld);
• (c)  Ms C's objections were never addressed properly (not upheld); and
• (d)  Ms C was excluded from the planning process by the inappropriate use of standing orders (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that Planning staff take care before issuing standard letters to ensure that their terms apply to the circumstances pertaining.

The Park Authority have accepted the recommendation and will act on it accordingly.

Overview

The complaint concerns allegations made on behalf of Mr and Mrs C by their MSP (Mr D) that the care received by their daughter (Ms C) from social work staff, prior to her death, was both ineffective and inappropriate.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  Ms C was placed in care contrary to her wishes, and regardless of the fact that she had carers to look after her in her own home (not upheld); and
• (b)  Council officers failed to respond to voice and email messages (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

Overview

The complainant (Mr C) complained about Angus Council (the Council)'s alleged failure to take action on his complaints about noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour at a hotel close to his home.  Furthermore, he contended that the Council failed to adhere to their customer care policy when dealing with his complaint.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that the Council:

• (a)  failed to take action on his complaints about noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour at a hotel close to his home (not upheld); and
• (b)  failed to adhere to their customer care policy when dealing with his complaint (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

Overview

The complainant (Mr C) complained that two Council officers pursued a personal vendetta against him and his family.  He said as a consequence, he has been incorrectly pursued for nearly £7,000 in Council Tax arrears which he felt obliged to pay.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  Council officers pursued a vendetta against Mr C by treating his neighbour more favourably and not enforcing her tenancy conditions (not upheld); and
• (b)  Mr C was incorrectly pursued for Council Tax arrears and that affected his right to buy his Council house (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

Overview

The complainant (Mrs C) raised a number of concerns regarding her late mother (Mrs A)'s application to purchase her council house from The Highland Council (the Council).  Mrs C felt that the Council had unnecessarily delayed the process and, as a result, the sale was not completed prior to her mother's death.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  a staff member's lack of knowledge of relevant legislation which sets out a tenant's right to buy (RTB) their council rented property resulted in a delay in the processing of the application (not upheld); and
• (b)  the Council's actions delayed the processing of the application unnecessarily and the clarification of Mrs A's eligibility to buy her Council house (not upheld).

Redress and Recommendations

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

Overview

The complainant (Mrs C) was unhappy that The City of Edinburgh Council (the Council) had agreed to sell some land to a neighbour and to also allow the neighbour to garden some land owned by the Council.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are:

• (a)  the decision of the Council to sell the land (not upheld); and
• (b)  the decision of the Council to allow a neighbour to garden some land owned by the Council (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Council:

• (i) ensure all relevant staff dealing with a land purchase application are informed when complaints are being considered;
• (ii)  ensure that complainants are kept informed of the progress of their complaint; and
• (iii)  clarify the maintenance arrangements for the land with Mrs C.

The Council have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

Overview

The complainant (Mrs C)'s son (Mr A) has an inherited genetic disease and she believed that his head teacher showed a lack of care and compassion for him and a lack of respect for her as a parent.  Mrs C maintained that she made a number of formal complaints about this but, that North Lanarkshire Council (the Council) failed to respond properly, explore all relevant issues and speak with independent witnesses.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  the Council did not properly investigate a complaint against the head teacher and witness statements were not sought (partially upheld);
• (b)  the Council failed to adhere to an undertaking to provide a corrected minute (partially upheld);
• (c)  the Council failed to abide to an agreement concerning home tuition (no finding);
• (d)  the head teacher inappropriately sought information about a private meeting (not upheld);
• (e)  the head teacher failed to enter properly into the spirit of mediation (not upheld); and
• (f)  the Council failed to provide a proper explanation for the reasons why a photograph of her son had been publicly displayed (upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Council apologise to Mrs C for the fact that an unfavourable minute was issued; for the fact that information on home tuition was not made available earlier; and for the time and trouble she spent trying to establish the circumstances which took place with regard to the photograph.

In addition, the Ombudsman recommends that the Council:

• (i)  have in place a published policy on arrangements for home tuition,
• (ii)  always provide clarification of the process required  in the preparation of home tuition work, for instance as was clarified to Mrs C in August 2006; and
• (iii)  review their existing complaints procedure where it concerns head teachers, in order to exclude the possibility of them investigating complaints made against themselves.

Overview

The complainant raised a number of concerns regarding the installation of a bus stop outside his home.  He claimed that the Council had failed to adhere to their Customer Care Policy in locating the stop outside his home and also breached health and safety policies.  He also claimed that the Council failed to consider his privacy when deciding the location of the bus stop.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are the Council's failure to:

• (a)  adhere to health and safety legislation when deciding on the site of the bus stop (not upheld);
• (b)  adhere to the aims of the Customer Care Policy when deciding to install the bus stop (partially upheld); and
• (c)  consider the impacts on Mr C's privacy when deciding on the location of the bus stop (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Council:

• (i)        review their procedures for locating bus stops; and
• (ii)       issue an apology to Mr C for the failure to adhere to the Customer Care Policy in relation to Mr C's complaint.

The Council have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

Overview

The complainant, Miss C, was unhappy that despite initially agreeing to sell to her some land next to her home which she said she had been gardening for some time, the City of Edinburgh Council (the Council) decided they would only sell her a reduced amount of land and required some of the landscaping to be undone.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are:

• (a)  the decision of the Council to sell some but not all of the land to Miss C (not upheld); and
• (b)  the decision of the Council to remove some of the gardening on the land retained by them (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Council:

• (i)  clarify their policy on 'piecemeal' sales; and
• (ii)  clarify the maintenance arrangements for the land with Miss C.

The Council have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.