Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council responded to an information request about a Rent Repayment Order. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council gave the wrong information to an organisation representing his claim for a Rent Repayment Order (RRO). Mr X said this led to him being unable to pursue his RRO. Mr X would like the Council to apologise, accept it was the Council’s mistake that led to him not being able to obtain an RRO and provide compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X used a third-party organisation to pursue an RRO against his former landlord.
6. An RRO allows tenants to receive up to two year’s worth of rent from a landlord who has committed committing certain housing related offences. A tenant can apply for an RRO at any point within two years of a landlord committing relevant offences.
7. The third-party organisation contacted the Council in March 2024 to ask for information to support Mr X’s RRO application. The Council responded to the enquiry and provided the organisation with two different dates in response to a question about the date of Mr X’s landlord’s licence application. The third-party organisation contacted the Council again in February 2025 to clarify the licence application date. The Council confirmed the correct date.
8. Mr X said the third-party organisation had been working to a deadline of April 2025 based on information the Council had provided. Mr X said he missed the deadline to apply for an RRO due to the Council giving an incorrect date to the third-party organisation.
9. In its complaint response, the Council apologised to Mr X for giving conflicting information to his third-party representative in March 2024. The Council told Mr X it would not provide compensation and it did not agree the Council’s actions were why his RRO application was out of time. It noted the third-party organisation had taken nine months to contact the Council to clarify the correct license application date. The Council suggested Mr X raise the matter of compensation with his third-party representative.
10. We will not investigate this complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. The Council apologised to Mr X for its error in providing conflicting information, stated it did not agree its actions were the reason why the RRO claim could not be pursued, and stated it would not provide compensation.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman