Summary: There was no evidence of fault by the Council. The Council gave Mr B details of the visit he requested and there is no evidence to support his view that he was told he would get a report to assist him with a claim against his landlord or support with obtaining new housing.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr B, complains the Council has not provided him with details of an inspection carried out at his rental property in February 2019. Mr B said this had caused him financial distress and he was near homeless.
2. Mr B says the Council did not provide the support promised in the meeting of February 2019.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read the papers put in by Mr B.
6. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
7. Mr B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I did not receive any comments.

Back to top

What I found

8. Mr B moved into a private rental property in June 2018.
9. There was a complaint to the Council on 4 February 2019 that Mr B’s property was in disrepair. The Council confirmed there was no planning or building control permission for the garage conversion and gave notice to enter.
10. The Environmental Health Officer (EHO) visited on 15 February 2019. At the inspection the officer identified the flat was not suitable as a dwelling because it had been converted without planning permission and did not comply with building regulations. Although the property was not suitable as a dwelling, there was no imminent risk present on the day to warrant an emergency prohibition and smoke detection was also fitted that day. Officers stated they were willing to provide time for Mr B to find alternative accommodation before serving a prohibition notice
11. Mr B’s landlord gave him 30 days notice to end his lodger tenancy on 15 February 2019 due to structural work needed at the property.
12. Mr B told the EHO by email that he moved out on 23 February as there had been no smoke detector until 11 February, when it was installed, but was still not working. Mr B said he took the EHO’s advice and sought alternative accommodation but was only told on 25 February that he should have stayed in the property until the planning commission attended on 9 March. Mr B said he had nothing in writing from the Council about the officers visit on 15 February and the landlady owed him money and his deposit. Mr B said he was trying to claim it from the small claims court and asked for copies of emails or letters from the investigation.
13. Mr B’s landlady told the Council that she no longer intended to rent the property out. The case was closed on 30 April 2019.
14. The Council sent Mr B information on 9 May 2019. The email said ‘on the day of inspection the property did not present any category one hazards that require the property to be prohibited in an emergency. Working smoke detection was fitted by the end of that day and planning is a separate issue. The deposit is a civil matter between tenant and landlady and the Council does not provide post inspection reports to support civil claims’. The Council it told Mr B he would not qualify for Council housing and should look for alternative accommodation. The officer said that building control was due to visit on 9 March 2019 and suggested that Mr B may want to be present for this if he wanted to know the outcome as they would not provide a post-inspection report for housing.
15. Mr B complains the Council did not provide the support it promised when the officer visited his property. Mr B said that the officer told him they would provide a report, but there is no written evidence of this and it is clear from the emails that Mr B understanding of what happened on the visit is very different to the Council officers. It is not possible for me to know exactly what officers said on the visit and so I cannot reach a view on exactly what officers told Mr B. It is clear from the EHO’s notes that they told him that if he needed to move out from the property he would need to find his own alternative accommodation.
16. Mr B complains the Council has not provided him with a report of the inspection on February 2019. The Council has explained to Mr B that is does not provide post-inspection reports for civil court claims but has given him details of the visit in its email of 9 May 2019.
17. I can find no fault on this point. The Council provided Mr B with details of the inspection it carried out. Clearly Mr B expected to receive a comprehensive report that would help him with his claim but there is no legal duty for the Council to do this.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I have completed my investigation. This complaint is not upheld as I have found no evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman