The complainant raised a number of complaints regarding a development near his home. His complaint was that the development was breaching terms of the planning permission granted by the Council as well as other issues regarding the development.
Local Government
Overview
The complainant accepted that he signed for the tenancy of a flat but said he did not take up occupancy. He was aggrieved six and a half years later when Inverclyde Council (the Council) informed him that there was outstanding council tax owed by him on the property and arrears of rent. The investigation did not uncover maladministration or service failure by the Council.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints from Mr C that I investigated are that:
- (a) the Council failed properly to investigate Mr C's contention that he had terminated his acceptance of the tenancy before moving in (not upheld);
- (b) the Council wrongly pursued Mr C in late 2005 for outstanding council tax and rent arrears dating back to 1999/2000 (not upheld); and
- (c) the Council took action to arrest his bank account when he understood them to be still investigating matters (not upheld).
Redress and recommendation
The Ombudsman has no recommendation to make.
Overview
The complainant (Mrs C) was banned indefinitely from attending a swimming pool run by South Ayrshire Council (the Council) following an incident with a swimming instructress on 9 December 2004. Her husband, Mr C, pursued a complaint to the Council on her behalf, the outcome of which was delayed by action taken by the Instructress. After giving written assurances, Mrs C's ban was lifted in June 2005.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints from Mrs C that I have investigated are that:
(a) the Council failed to address and properly investigate the complaint made on Mrs C's behalf against the Instructress (not upheld);
(b) the decision to ban Mrs C from the Pool was precipitate and was taken without hearing her account (partially upheld); and
(c) after being informed of the Procurator Fiscal's decision in relation to a report by the instructress, the Council did not re-examine conflicting accounts of members of staff relating to the incident (not upheld).
Redress and recommendation
The Ombudsman recommended that a suitably worded apology be issued in respect of the initial letter sent to Mr C and this was done before this report was published. The Ombudsman also recommended that steps should be taken to avoid a repetition.
Overview
The complainant is the Chairman of the Tenants' and Residents' Association of a multi-storey building and made his complaint on their behalf. They were unhappy about North Lanarkshire Council's handling of the internal communication system to the concierge station.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints from Mr C which I have investigated are that:
- (a) the Council failed to repair the internal communication system to the concierge station (not upheld);
- (b) the Council failed to repair the internal door entry system (not upheld); and
- (c) the Council failed to ensure the provision of a proper communication system for the lifts in the event of breakdown (not upheld).
Redress and recommendation
The Ombudsman has no recommendation to make.
The complainants complained about what they considered was a lack of formal process for altering the geographic lines of planning zones in the area around their home.
Overview
The complainant raised a number of concerns over the handling of his stepson's application for Housing and Council Tax Benefit. Issues relating to the subsequent handling of the complaint by The City of Edinburgh Council were also raised as complaints.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints which have been investigated are:
- (a) adequacy of the explanation by Council staff for the failure to respond to the complaint (not upheld);
- (b) adequacy of explanation by staff regarding failure to process Request for Review (not upheld);
- (c) the investigation of the complaint (not upheld); and
- (d) contradictory nature of information provided regarding Housing Benefit application (not upheld).
Redress and recommendations
The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.
Overview
The complainant raised a number of concerns about the standard of classroom accommodation in his daughter's Primary School and the way those complaints had been dealt with by the City of Edinburgh Council (the Council).
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints which have been investigated are:
- (a) the Council's alleged failure to address seven concerns first identified by Mr C in an email of 6 September 2004 within a reasonable timescale (partially upheld); and
- (b) promises of action to be taken given in correspondence were either delayed or not implemented at all (partially upheld).
Redress and recommendation
The Ombudsman recommended that the Council review their complaints handling procedures for complaints concerning their services to children and young people.
The Council responded that the Director of Children and Families had instructed a major review of the Department's complaints handling procedures.
Overview
The complainant (Mr C) raised concerns that the Cairngorms National Park Authority (the Authority) failed to treat his planning application in a fair and consistent manner, in that it called in his application but had not called in a similar one; that the time taken to decide the application was excessive; and that the Authority failed to decide the application at the site visit after saying they would.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints which have been investigated are:
- (a) failure to treat Mr C's application in a fair and consistent manner compared to another (not upheld); and
- (b) the time taken to determine the application was excessive and the Authority failed to make a decision at a site visit after saying they would (not upheld).
Redress and recommendations
The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.
Overview
This complaint concerns dissatisfaction with the handling of a complaint about a decision to refuse an application for payment under the Discretionary Housing Payment scheme.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints which have been investigated are that:
- (a) two steps of the investigation process were carried out by the same Council employee (not upheld);
- (b) the Council failed to provide Mr C with details of the changes in legislation that affected his application (not upheld);
- (c) the Council failed to address Mr C's complaint that the Disability Living Allowance should not be taken into account in determining the application (upheld); and
- (d) the Council failed to provide Mr C with the correct information about their complaints procedure (upheld).
Redress and Recommendations
The Ombudsman recommends that Fife Council apologise personally to Mr C for the failings identified in this report.
Fife Council accepts the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.
Overview
This investigation regards a complaint from the Secretary (Mr C) of a voluntary association (the Association) about the City of Edinburgh Council (the Council)'s handling of the Association's objections to applications which affected the setting of a Grade A listed building.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints which have been investigated are:
- (a) alleged failure to consider the Association's objections (partially upheld); and
- (b) alleged failure to refer the applications to Scottish Ministers (not upheld).
Redress and recommendations
The Council accepted the Ombudsman's recommendation that the Council apologise to Mr C for their failure adequately to articulate the Association's objections. They also informed her of changes they had introduced to the format of committee reports on planning applications.