Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about selective licences because Mr Y could have appealed to the First Tier (Property Chamber) Tribunal and it is reasonable to expect him to have done this.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains about two selective licences the Council has issued him. He is unhappy that the licences have different expiry dates and says this will have a detrimental financial impact on him.

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 has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. The First-tier (Property Chamber) Tribunal is an independent judicial body in England that handle applications, appeals and references relating to disputes over property and land.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council issued Mr Y a selective licence in March 2025, which expires in February 2030. The Council issued Mr Y a further selective licence in October 2025, which expires in March 2027. Mr Y complained to the Council about this. He says the Council was inconsistent in its approach and raised concerns about administrative fairness.
8. The Council’s current selective licence scheme runs from April 2022 to March 2027. It is currently consulting on proposals to bring in a new scheme from April 2027. The Council says that between issuing Mr Y’s separate licences, it decided to match the licence term to the scheme’s duration. It said this was to ensure legal clarity and explained this is why the second licence expires in line with its current scheme.
9. The Council apologised to Mr Y for not explaining this clearly prior to him choosing to submit a complaint, but confirmed both licences were issued correctly. It said it will review applications and discounts based on when applications are made if the scheme is renewed in 2027.
10. I acknowledge Mr Y’s current position. However, he could have appealed to the First-tier (Property Chamber) Tribunal if he disagreed with the terms of the licences. The Council explained Mr Y’s appeal rights in its decision letters sent to him when issuing the selective licences. It is reasonable to expect Mr Y to have used this right and therefore we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because he could have appealed to the First Tier (Property Chamber) Tribunal and it is reasonable to expect him to have done this.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman