Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to investigate Mrs X’s complaint about dampness causing a statutory nuisance at her leasehold home. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council’s failure to take action over her complaint about dampness in her leasehold home which she says is a statutory nuisance.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X reported dampness in her leasehold flat to the Council because she believes it may be a statutory nuisance. The Council considered her report and told her that it could carry out a visit but that her complaint was one concerning housing disrepair and that she could seek a more appropriate remedy through a civil action against the freeholder or by appealing to the First Tier Property Tribunal. Mrs X remained dissatisfied with eh decision and asked the Council to take action.
7. The Council told her it did not consider the matter amounted to a statutory nuisance and that she should use the alternative remedies available to her.
8. When considering complaints, we may not question the merits of the decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Councils’ officers or members. This means we will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions. In this case the Council properly considered Mrs X’s complaint, but it advised her that there are more appropriate remedies available for disrepair in leasehold property.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to investigate Mrs X’s complaint about dampness causing a statutory nuisance at her leasehold home. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman