Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about damage caused to his home following two visits from London Fire Brigade. Part of the complaint is late. It is reasonable for him to pursue a compensation claim for damage to his property through the courts and an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Authority forced entry into his home unnecessarily on two occasions in 2022 and 2025, causing damage to his home and distress. He says the Authority has failed to provide a satisfactory response to his complaint or take suitable action against an officer involved.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something an Authority has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about a personnel issue. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5a, paragraph 4, as amended)
5. 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)
6. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about a visit to his property in 2022. This complaint is late and there is no good reason to investigate now.
10. In 2025, the Authority visited Mr X’s property again. There was no response at the property and officers could not reach Mr X by phone. Officers were concerned for Mr X’s welfare and so forced entry into the property. Mr X states this was unnecessary and caused distress and damage to his doorway and carpet.
11. In its complaint response, the Authority acknowledged that there had been a miscommunication between teams which led officers to believe they were attending a potential emergency. This ultimately led to the decision to force entry. The Authority apologised to him for this. It said it would provide further training to relevant officers and improve its communication to prevent it happening again in similar circumstances. It advised him of its process if he wished to make a claim for damage to his property.
12. We will not investigate this complaint as it would not lead to a different outcome. The Authority has explained how the situation occurred and apologised to him for this. This is a suitable remedy for any distress caused. It has also acted to improve its service and prevent a similar situation happening again.
13. If Mr X wishes to claim compensation for damage to his property, he can make a claim to the Authority’s insurers. If he is unhappy with the outcome, he can pursue his claim by taking the Authority to court.
14. Mr X wants the Authority to take disciplinary action again an officer involved. We cannot investigate personnel matters and could not require the Authority to do this.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because part of the complaint is late and an investigation into recent matters would not lead to a different outcome. We cannot investigate personnel matters and if Mr X wishes to pursue a claim for compensation, he can do this through the Authority’s insurers and the courts.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman