Seven complaints made about the borough council to the Local Government Ombudsman were upheld last year.

And the authority has been given a rap on the knuckles for being slow to put remedies into action.

The authority was found to be at fault by the national watchdog in disputes over planning, social care, parking enforcement and traffic management and child protection.

The upholding of seven out of 10 complaints is a higher rate than the English average, where 56 per cent of complaints are found to be valid. But a total of 10 complaints over the year 2019-020 is slightly lower than average.

West Berkshire had 11 complaints, with six upheld, Dorset Council had 16 complaints, Bath and North East Somerset 12 complaints, while in Wiltshire there were 19 complaints upheld out of a total of 37 made.

The letter from the ombudsman Michael King to the council’s chief executive Susie Kemp raises concerns about the speed of resolution of issues.

Mr King said: “It is disappointing that in three cases, remedies were not completed within the agreed timescales and we had to chase the council to achieve compliance.

“While I appreciate the pressures local authorities are under, delays in implementing remedies can add to complainants’ injustice. I would ask the council to reflect on the way it implements remedies, with a view to providing us with more timely responses in the future.”

There was also a criticism about council staff taking too long to respond to inquiries from the ombudsman’s office.

Rob Jandy, the borough council’s cabinet member for organisational excellence said: “The council takes all complaints seriously and where appropriate adjusts and improves its processes accordingly.

“It is worth noting that less than two per cent of all complaints logged with the council are referred to the ombudsman and of those only 12 per cent were upheld.

“We also compare favourably to our local neighbours in terms of the number of upheld complaints. Having said that, we will continue to review our systems to ensure that we minimise any delay in providing responses.

“The main areas of learning from all upheld reports have been to ensure we keep contact with residents throughout the process of their complaint, and to form a more consistent approach to dealing with complaints corporately.”

Coun Jandy added a new feedback and complaints policy has been put in place in January, with significant improvements, and added: “The cabinet will consider a report from the monitoring officer about this in October which will include further review and recommendations.”

One householder said the council was wrong to grant planning permission for an extension on his neighbour’s house which blocked light from his kitchen.

The ombudsman found the council was “at fault for having an unclear policy, for a failure to inform its planning committee of that policy, and for breach of an undertaking to enforce a breach of planning permission.”

The council was told to pay the householder compensation not just for the blockage of the light but for his time and trouble in trying to get it remedied.

A woman complained about a poor standard of care offered to her at night and the watchdog found this caused her distress and anxiety.

The council agreed to apologise and pay compensation and review its policy.

The Ombudsman decided in one complaint that a householder shouldn’t be paid compensation, but should be paid an undisclosed sum because of the trouble he took to complain and the distress he felt over the delay in implementing promised parking restrictions. The man said one of the reasons he bought his house was because such restrictions were promised.

A couple were given £250 by the borough council as an apology because the authority failed to arrange contact with their grandchildren who were going into council care. The ombudsman also found fault with the way officers communicated with the couple and they way they dealt with their complaint.

The council sent a parking fine to the wrong house, increased the penalty when it wasn’t paid and asked enforcement agents to get involved, causing the wronged motorist injustice because he had to pay much higher fine, the watchdog found. It will cost £550 in compensation and an apology to the car owner.

A couple going through child protection procedures were not given the support they deserved and their complaint was upheld. The couple will receive compensation and the council will change its process in future.