Summary: Mrs B complained on behalf of the residents’ association that the Council failed to ensure the caravan site they live on complies with the site licence and legal requirements. The Council initially dealt with possible breaches of the licence effectively. However, it has failed to determine whether the Electrical Safety Certificate meets the requirements, and it took too long to deal with Mrs B’s complaints about this. This caused the residents frustration and continued uncertainty. The Council will apologise to Mrs B and make a symbolic payment. The Council will also determine whether the certificate meets the requirements, write to Mrs B to let her know, and set out what it will do to make sure any breach is remedied.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complains on behalf of the residents’ association that the Council has failed to ensure that the residential caravan site that they live on has an up-to-date Electrical Safety Certificate.
2. Mrs B says that the residents are concerned that the owner is not taking responsibility for the safety of the electric supply to their homes and that many of the residents are vulnerable.

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 consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Mrs B and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mrs B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

7. Mrs B is the chair of a residents’ association for a residential caravan park site. This runs on a licence issued by the Council. It is a condition of the licence that the site has an annual Electrical Safety Check. The electric meters are housed centrally and not within individual homes. There are individual electric supplies from the meter to each home.
8. The licence for the site says:
• The site shall be provided with an electricity supply sufficient to meet all reasonable demands of the caravans.
• Electrical installations other than Electricity Board works and circuits should be installed and maintained in accordance with the relevant regulations.
• A qualified electrician should inspect the installation at least annually.
9. The current standard licence condition (known as the model condition) says that the electricity should meet the requirements of the site safely. It shall be designed, installed, tested, inspected and maintained in accordance with the law.
10. Electrical testing was due in November 2022. The site owner did not do this and the residents pursued this with the owner but it was not resolved. The residents told the Council the owner was in breach of this and other licence conditions and asked it to take enforcement action.
11. The Council raised the issues with the owner and visited the site. The owner at first said there was an Electrical Safety Certificate and then told the Council that the electrical contractor was due to issue a new certificate in a few weeks. The Council said that they must do so urgently.
12. At the end of July 2023, the Council met with the residents on site. The electrician had issued a new certificate, but this only covered the street lighting. The residents said it should also cover the supply to their homes. The Council raised this and other outstanding issues with the owner.
13. The owner did not satisfy the Council that it had met all the licence conditions and so, at the end of August 2023, the Council served a compliance notice. This required the owner to take certain action, including inspecting the means of electricity supply to the homes, and the communal meter housing. The owner had until the end of October to complete the work. Throughout this period, the Council kept the residents up to date with its actions.
14. The site owner immediately raised with the Council that the Electrical Safety Certificate for the street lighting was sufficient because it would not enter homes to check the electricity supplies and it is not responsible for the electric meters.
15. The Council clarified the requirements of the compliance notice with the owner. It said it had consulted its own electricians. It understood that the owner is not responsible for the individual supply to the homes, but is responsible for the communal meters and the housing. The Council said the owner must have this inspected and get a report that it is safe.
16. The Council visited the site at the end of November and found there was still no Electrical Safety Certificate. It also found the owner had done some work but not all issues had been remedied in line with the compliance notice.
17. As the owner had done some of the required work, the Council extended the deadline for full compliance to the end of January 2024. The owner reassured the Council that an electrician had attended and would issue the new certificate. The owner then discovered the electrician had not done the work and so he appointed a new contractor to inspect the electrical installations.
18. The Council monitored the situation and stressed to the owner that the electrical inspection was urgent. The owner sent the Council the new Electrical Safety Certificate in mid-February. The electrician said they had only carried out a visual inspection of the meter housing because some residents would not allow them to stop the power while they tested the supply. The owner also again said that they were not responsible for the means of individual supply of electricity to each home.
19. The Council told the owner that they did not have to inspect the individual supply to each home, but a visual only inspection of the meter housing was not sufficient.
20. At the beginning of March 2024, the owner told the Council that their electrician could not test the meters or the supply to the meters because this equipment belongs to the National Grid. The Council got written confirmation of this from the electrician and agreed that the owner could rely on a visual inspection of the communal meter housing to make sure it is safe.
21. At the beginning of April 2024, the Council confirmed that the owner had met the compliance notice and it updated the residents. Mrs B told the Council that the Electrical Safety Certificate was not sufficient. The Council initially maintained that the owner did not have to do more because the licence condition was clear that they did not need a certificate for equipment belonging to the National Grid. The Council apologised for giving conflicting information about this.
22. Mrs B maintained the owner is responsible for inspecting the supply to each home, and sent the Council more information to support her position. At the beginning of August 2024, Mrs B complained to the Council that it had failed to resolve this issue.
23. The Council said it had investigated the issue, and followed its enforcement policy. It acknowledged that the exact requirements of the licence condition were disputed and it had not decided whether the site owner had to inspect the means of individual supply to each home. The Council said it would continue its investigation to make sure the electrical testing meets the current law.
24. Mrs B asked the Council to consider her complaint at stage two of its process. She said that the lack of adequate testing was a safety issue and it is a legal requirement.
25. The Council responded three months later, in November 2024. It apologised for the delay in responding. It said it had not decided whether the current certificate meets the requirements of the licence. It had not decided what exactly constitutes an electrical installation and whether it includes the communal supply box and wiring to individual homes.
26. The Council’s case notes show that it consulted colleagues within the authority, and in neighbouring authorities in August 2024 and March 2025.
27. Mrs B complained to the Ombudsman on behalf of the residents’ association. The Council has still not decided whether the Electrical Safety Certificate submitted by the site operator complied with the regulations and the licence condition.

Findings

28. It is clear that Mrs B and other residents have been dealing with this issue for a long time, and the lack of progress has been frustrating. It is not for the Ombudsman to decide whether the site owner has complied with the licensing conditions or any other legal requirements. That is for the Council to decide.
29. The Council dealt with the residents’ concerns that the site owner was not meeting the site licence conditions without delay. It visited the site several times and pursued compliance with the site owner. The Council is required to make sure that formal enforcement action is proportionate and so it was not fault to try to resolve these breaches before resorting to further action.
30. The Council’s case notes show that it kept residents fully up to date throughout its investigation, it proactively monitored the situation, checked for progress, and kept a suitable level of management oversight. It moved onto the formal stage and issued a compliance notice in good time. Again, it made sure that it checked for progress on meeting the requirements of the notice.
31. There was a dispute about the exact requirements of the electrical testing. The Council’s case notes show that it considered this in detail and relying on advice it decided that, to the best of its understanding, the owner had complied with these requirements. It was open to the Council to decide this based on the information it had at the time.
32. There was no fault in how the Council dealt with the issues throughout 2023 and up to July 2024.
33. However, there was fault by the Council following Mrs B’s challenge to the Council’s position. The Council made some more enquiries in September 2024 and then again in March 2025, but has not taken any further action to determine the issue. I appreciate that the Council’s service has limited capacity and other priorities. However, it is now over a year since July 2024, when the Council told Mrs B it would reconsider whether the site owner had complied with the licence conditions, and this is too long. Mrs B and the other residents have a legitimate expectation that the Council would do this and come back to them with a decision.
34. There was also fault in the Council’s complaint handling. It took three months to respond to Mrs B’s complaint at stage two of its process and again, this was too long. In addition, the response did not fully address the complaint because it said that it would continue its consideration of the issue. It did not give an answer, nor set out what action the Council would take to reach a decision, nor how much longer this might take.
35. The Council’s shortcomings have caused Mrs B, and the residents, frustration and continued uncertainty.

Back to top

Action

36. The Council will within one month of the date of this decision:
• Apologise to the residents’ association for the faut I have identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Make a symbolic payment to Mrs B of £150 in recognition of the frustration and uncertainty its fault has caused.
37. The Council will within three months of the date of this decision:
• Determine whether the current Electrical Safety Certificate meets the licence conditions and legal requirements.
• Write to Mrs B setting out its decision and how it has reached this.
• If the Council decides the site owner needs to do more to meet the requirements, it will write to Mrs B with an action plan of how it will ensure the owner complies, including the likely time scales involved.
38. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

39. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman