Education transport and special educational needs
The council failed to consider properly the recommendations made by its appeal panel that the complainant's son, who has special educational needs, should attend a particular school and that the council should provide him with transport to school.
St Helens MBC (95/C/286)
The council failed to consider properly an application for planning permission for an extension to the house next door to the complainant's home. The extension has an overshadowing effect on their home. Council officers did not notice errors in the plans, and as a result the council's decision was taken on the basis of incorrect and misleading information. Also, the extension did not conform to the council's policy on the impact of neighbouring developments.
Liverpool City Council (94/C/4192)
The council failed to ensure that its officer's recommendation for a remedy for a structural defect in the complainants' home was properly implemented. When the defect recurred, the council failed to respond properly and failed to take action on the neighbouring property (as the defect was in the party wall).
Liverpool City Council (92/C/2864)
The council failed to deal properly with a couple's enquiry about a renovation grant. In particular it failed to tell them that there would be a substantial delay in processing their application. They were left to make or defer important decisions about doing repairs without the benefit of this information.
Liverpool City Council (93/C/324)
The council delayed in dealing with a woman's request for a housing renovation grant.
FURTHER REPORTS (FIRST REPORT FOUND MALADMINISTRATION AND INJUSTICE)
Luton BC (94/B/268)
Council housing management
The council carried out a home security survey to a tenant's property. It failed to ensure that its contractor completed the agreed security work at her home, and the complainant was unable to obtain home contents insurance during this period. When her home was burgled she was unable to make an insurance claim on the loss.
The ombudsman found that although the completion of the work may not have prevented the burglary, it would have enabled her to obtain adequate insurance. The uninsured loss was therefore the direct result of the council's failure. The council apologised to the complainant and completed the security work but declined to pay the compensation. The ombudsman therefore issued his further report calling on the full council to reconsider the matter.