When the independent watchdog finds a council at fault, it tells the council how to put things right. This estimates how many cases ended with the council failing to do what the watchdog required. It is arguably the most damning number here: the council was proven wrong, given a remedy to deliver, and still didn't deliver it. Anything above zero deserves attention; zero is what every council should show.
| name | lgsco_compliance_failures |
|---|---|
| dataset | 09-ombudsman-lgsco |
| kind | constructed |
| type | count |
| unit | cases/year |
| grain | council-year |
| role | outcome |
| source | `Number of cases with a compliance outcome recorded during the year` × (1 − compliance rate/100) (lgsco file 3) |
| period | 2023-24 and 2024-25 editions |
| missingness | Rows exist only for councils in scope of LGSCO; `Upheld decisions per 100,000 residents` and rate columns are blank for zero-decision councils. Percent columns in file 2 are strings like `67%`. Join to Housing Ombudsman data is by name and lossy (ALMO/association names don't match council names). |
| score_note | Hard non-compliance outcome, though constructed/estimated from the rate and small counts. |
| peer_group | council class (district / county / unitary / metropolitan / London) — not yet scored on the leaderboard |
Estimated count of cases where the council failed to implement ombudsman recommendations. The hardest failure signal in the dataset — fault was found, a remedy was required, and the council did not comply.