The complaint

1. Mr X complains that during refurbishment of his House of Multiple Occupation (HMO) the Council approved him a provisional licence for a six-bed ensuite property. The Council later admitted it had made an error with its measurements which meant the property was suitable for only a five-and-a-half bed HMO. Mr X says this mistake caused significant stress and financial loss. He wants a formal apology and reimbursement for the financial losses resulting from the Council’s error.

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. The law says 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)
4. 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 we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. A Council Officer measured the rooms in Mr X’s property and issued a provisional license for six-bedroom House in Multiple Occupation (HMO). A later inspection found these measurements to be incorrect meaning the property was suitable only as a 5.5-bedroom not the six-bedroom as provisionally granted.
8. Mr X complained saying the mistake has caused him financial loss through reduced rent and lower property value, as well as stress and anxiety.
9. The Council apologised for the measuring error but refused Mr X’s request for financial compensation. It explained its published policy makes clear it is the licence holder’s responsibility to ensure all rooms meet the legal minimum size.
10. The Council said it regretted the inconvenience, stress, and confusion caused to Mr X. It has since introduced measures to prevent similar errors in the future, including specific measuring methods and double-checking when measurements are close to minimum statutory requirements.
11. Mr X says the issue arose because the Council gave him incorrect advice, which led him to believe he could obtain rent for six bedrooms. He believes the Council was negligent and that it is inappropriate to assert the responsibility was his alone. He says if the Council had given him the correct advice he could have made the required changes during refurbishment. Mr X believes the Council should compensate him for this error.
12. We cannot decide liability or determine whether the Council is legally responsible for Mr X’s alleged losses. This is a legal claim which only the courts or insurers can determine. Consequently, any claim for losses in rental income or property value, which Mr X considers the Council to be responsible for, are matters more appropriately dealt with by the courts. It is reasonable for Mr X to pursue his claim through the courts. Because of this, we will not investigate this element of his complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. We cannot achieve the outcome Mr X is looking for because the court is better placed to consider his legal claim for financial losses and there is no further public interest to justify our investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman