Summary: Mr B complains about the Council’s handling of a Notice it issued to him under s79 of the Public Health Act 1936. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr B, says the Council was wrong to serve him with a s79 Notice under the Public Health Act 1936 and at the property address to which the Notice related instead of using his company’s registered office address. As a result, he had to pay the Council for removing and disposing of the noxious matter the subject of the Notice and says he should have this refunded.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Mr B and the Council. I gave Mr B the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr B bought a property which he converted into two separate flats and then rented out to tenants. The two flats are owned by his company.
5. The Council issued a Notice at the property under s 79 of the Public Health Act 1936 which required the removal of noxious matter by a set date, after which time the Council warned it would remove it and charge for the work. The Notice was addressed to Mr B’s company.
6. As the waste matter was not removed, the Council did the work itself and then sent the invoice to Mr B at the property address.
7. Mr B complained to the Council that the first he had known about the matter was when he received the invoice and that the Council had been wrong to send the Notice to him at the property address when it should have used the address of his registered company. He said the Council had had his company address because it had used it when corresponding with him in 2015 about landlord licences for the two flats.
8. Mr B quoted from s79 of the Act which states the local authority shall serve notice on the owner or the occupier of the premises on which the noxious matter is found. The Council addressed Mr B’s complaint but confirmed it had served the Notice in accordance with the proper legal process and declined to refund the fee he had been charged.

Assessment

9. Mr B says the Council knew his company address because of another department’s earlier dealings with him as a landlord and that the address of his company would have been easily obtainable from Company House. However, the Council, having the option of issuing the Notice to the owner or occupier, obtained the owner’s address from the Land Registry. The entry for the proprietor records Mr B’s company at the property address and not at its current location.
10. The Council served notice on the owner, who is ultimately responsible for the property, and it used the address recorded in the Proprietorship Register at the Land Registry. Given this, I can see no evidence of fault by the Council nor grounds which warrant an investigation of the complaint by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it dealt with this matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman