Central Bedfordshire Council (21 018 730)
Category : Environment and regulation > Trading standards
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 04 May 2022
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to prosecute an estate agent with whom the complainant is in dispute. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met.
The complaint
- Mr X represents the complainant, Mrs Y. He complains the Council is wrongly interpreting the Company, Limited Liability & Business (names and trading disclosures) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations).
- Because of this, he says an estate agent is bullying Mrs Y, by chasing her for a bill which Mr X believes she is not obligated to pay.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
- The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Mr X says the contract Mrs X signed with an estate agent breached the Regulations.
- The Council investigated the complaint. They discovered the estate agent’s branches should print standard letters on headed paper which includes the estate agent name, branch address and contact details. However, when it produced the documents for Mrs Y, many staff were working from home because of the COVID 19 pandemic. Unfortunately, headed paper was not used, so the parent company details were entered on the documents, without the name of the estate agent, address or contact details.
- The Council is satisfied the estate agent did not deliberately send the documents to Mrs Y without their details. It believes this was an oversight because of disruption to normal working practices. It also confirmed the estate agents will include both the company name and the estate agent name on sales details going forward.
- Mr X believes that because the estate agent name was not on the contract and other documents, the contract is void and Mrs Y is not liable to pay the estate agent’s fee.
- We cannot normally deal with a complaint about the merits of a council’s properly-taken decision – for example, a decision not to prosecute a company. Councils have discretion on trading standards matters as to whether, and to what extent, to investigate a particular complaint. Their decisions are taken in the general interests of the public, rather than the interest of the individual complainant. So, complaining to the council does not necessarily mean an individual will not have to take their own legal action.
- We cannot adjudicate on disputed points of law. Nor can we require the Council to prosecute the estate agents. If Mr X and Mrs Y believe she is not liable to pay the estate agents fee it is open for her to take her own legal action. Only the courts can determine liability.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault in the way the Council considered Mr X’s complaint. And we cannot achieve the outcome sought.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman