Did the Local government Ombudsman help in your situation?

No it did not help and made a sensible solution even more unlikely. But is there really any choice for the public when the advice presented and decisions made by local authority employees are not sensible?

Without being too judgemental here about local authority employees (for I am one also) - we do have to be realistic. In any internal complaint process, it is probably not very realistic to expect those complained about to find themselves to be wrong. This process must have first taken place before a complaint to the LGO is possible.

You have to look at the nature of complaints and the quite different responses dependent on this and which raise many further questions.

For example, (a) one to the local authority from the public about noise and (b) one about the local authority from the public.

In (a) the whole system could certainly be seen as not only built to satisfy complainants but possibly as bound to encourage such complaints and to involve much available pieces of legislation in the process.

In (b) the whole system could certainly be seen as not only built to support the original decision but possibly as bound to discourage such complaints and to involve much available pieces of legislation in the process.

In (a) the complaint is most likely to be thought valid but in (b) the complaint is thought more likely not to be valid.

The statistic were that in 95% of the complaints, the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) found the complainants to be wrong. And in the remaining 5%, the complainants were not happy with the results of a supposed successful result in their favour.

The LGO is not an effective watchdog and without one - how can there be any expectation of help from this quarter or of there being any sensible actions resulting from local authority employees? For they know that any member of the public who is forced to complain about their actions, will only find the LGO too willing to findings against the complainant.