Summary: Ms X complains the Council has failed to carry out a HHSRS assessment at her property despite its state of disrepair. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council. Ms X’s landlord (a housing association) is responsible for the repairs and for finding her alternative accommodation while they are carried out.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, says the Council has failed in its duty to carry out a HHSRS (Housing Health and Safety Rating System) assessment at her property. She says it is aware of the outstanding repairs and should put her in alternative accommodation while the repairs are being carried out.

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
• 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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. In considering the complaint I spoke to Ms X and reviewed the information she and the Council provided. I gave Ms X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what she said.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms X is a housing association tenant. Her landlord has been directed by the court to carry out repairs at her property.
6. The works are of a nature which require Ms X and her children to be decanted to alternative accommodation while the works are carried out.
7. The housing association has made two offers of accommodation which Ms X says have been unsuitable and which she has refused.
8. Ms X complained to the Council saying it should carry out a HHSRS assessment which would highlight the disrepair issues and lead it to serving a Notice on her landlord to carry out the required works. She asked the Council to make her an offer of alternative accommodation so the landlord is able to do the work.
9. The Council advised Ms X that it was aware of the court case and that her family needed to be decanted so the work could be done. However, it said that the matter was between her and her landlord and suggested she seek legal advice if she thought the court’s recommendations were not being complied with. It noted her request that it provide her with emergency accommodation if the housing association obtained a court order to remove her from her home and said her request was being considered in accordance with homelessness legislation.
10. At Stage 2 of its complaints procedure the Council explained why it did not consider it appropriate to carry out a HHSRS assessment given that it was already aware of the outstanding repairs and that her landlord was willing to carry them out and had actively been trying to decant her into another property temporarily. The Council confirmed it had been told by the landlord that once the property was vacated a full survey would be carried out and it would address any other repair issues and that after this if Ms X remained concerned about the condition of the property the Council could then consider an inspection.
11. In response to my query as to the progress of the homeless application Ms X has made, the Council has said it is currently evaluating new information provided by Ms X before issuing its decision but that it has no reason to believe she is homeless as she has been offered alternative accommodation by her landlord.

Assessment

12. While I understand Ms X’s frustration at the time taken for the repairs to be carried out, the housing association is the body responsible for them and for finding her temporary accommodation during the decant. The action Ms X wants the Council to take in carrying out a HHSRS assessment would not change her position.
13. The Council is due to issue Ms X with its homeless decision shortly and if she wishes to challenge it, she has a legal remedy available through the courts to do so. As this is the case, and we would reasonably expect her to make use of her appeal rights, this matter falls outside our jurisdiction and will not be investigated.
14. In responding to my draft decision Ms X says she wants the Council to carry out the HHSRS inspection and that by law it has to do so. However, the relevant section of the Housing Act 2004 states that the authority must carry out an inspection if it thinks it is “appropriate”. Given there is no dispute about the repairs needed, and that the court has already considered the matter, the Council has decided that at this time an inspection is not “appropriate”. Even if an inspection was carried out, it would only find a situation which the court has already directed the landlord to remedy.

Back to top

Final decision

15. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council. Ms X’s landlord (a housing association) is responsible for the repairs and for finding her alternative accommodation while they are carried out.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman