Council house sales and leaseholders


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Haringey (16 009 510)

    Statement Upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 25-Aug-2017

    Summary: There was fault by the Council in relying on incorrect information held on its database when it refused Mr B's right to buy application in 2013. This meant Mr B was denied the opportunity to buy his property at an affordable price. The Council has agreed to sell the property to Mr B at its 2013 value.

  • London Borough of Hackney (16 009 995)

    Statement Upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 25-Aug-2017

    Summary: There is fault with how the Council has dealt with Ms X's Right to Buy application. The Council has offered Ms X a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

  • London Borough of Southwark (16 013 168)

    Statement Upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 14-Aug-2017

    Summary: the Council delayed issuing some right to buy documentation. There is no fault in how the Council handled the remainder of its communications with Mrs B. An apology and payment of £500 is satisfactory remedy for the injustice caused.

  • Bristol City Council (17 005 491)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 11-Aug-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X's complaint that the Council refuses to waive her obligation to repay part of her 'right to buy' discount. It is unlikely we would find fault by the Council and we cannot question the merits of its decision.

  • Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (17 003 964)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 18-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council's handling of, and decision on, his right to buy application. It was the Council's decision which caused Mr X's claimed injustice and had he disagreed with this it would have been reasonable for him to take the matter to court.

  • Milton Keynes Council (16 015 032)

    Statement Not upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 13-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Council advised Miss X of the options available if she felt it was delaying the sale of her council house. It was reasonable for her to use these options. There is no evidence of fault.

  • St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (17 002 960)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 05-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Local Government Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B's complaint that a payment protection policy was covertly applied to the mortgage he had with the Council. This is because the events happened 35 years ago, so any meaningful investigation is unlikely to be possible given the passage of time.

  • London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (17 003 200)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 13-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the purchase of a property under the Right to Buy scheme. He cannot investigate issues relating to the complainant's tenancy and the county court can decide any whether the Council has wrongly prevented the completion of the purchase.

  • New Forest District Council (17 002 493)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 13-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B's complaint that the Council is at fault in the way it dealt with his right to buy application. It is reasonable to expect Mr B to use the procedure set out in the Housing Act 1985 for delay in the right to buy process.

  • London Borough of Islington (16 004 825)

    Statement Upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 12-Jun-2017

    Summary: The complaint is about how the Council dealt with the complainant's application to buy their Council property under the Right to Buy legislation. I have found fault and agreed a remedy.

;