Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to properly consider evidence and take action over a rat infestation from her neighbour’s property. There was no fault in how the Council took the decision to take no further action, and I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to properly consider evidence and take action over a rat infestation from her neighbour’s property. Mrs X says the Council discriminated against her family, causing distress and leaving her family at risk of harm. She wants the Council to take action against her neighbour and carry out service improvements to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

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 consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

The Prevention of Damage by Pests Act 1949, section 2 (1))

6. Councils must, as far as is practical, ensure their district is kept free from rats and mice. Councils can:
• issue a notice requiring an owner or occupier to carry out works;
• carry out the works and recover costs from the owner if they do not do so; or
• complain to the court about an occupier preventing the owner completing works and seek that the court order the occupier to complete the works. (Prevention of Damage by Pests Act 1949, sections 4 and 5)
7. The Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide UK, Code of Best Practice, says a site survey should be carried out and used to establish any risks to human health, particularly children, non-target animals, such as pets and the environment.

Section 82 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990

8. A member of the public can also take private action against an alleged nuisance in the magistrates’ court. If the court decides they are suffering a statutory nuisance, it can order the person or people responsible to take action to stop or limit it.
9. This process does not involve the council, but it is good practice for councils to tell complainants about their right to take private action.

What happened

10. Mr and Mrs X contacted the Council about a strange smell in their home and the sound of scurrying. The Council visited Mr and Mrs X’s home. Its records show it did not detect any smell but identified damp spots on the party wall with their neighbour. The Council advised Mr and Mrs X that damp was not a matter for the Council. The Council told Mr and Mrs X to get back in touch if the smell returned.
11. Mr and Mrs X continued to contact the Council. They sent the Council pictures of rubbish in their neighbour’s garden and said they believed that was the cause of the infestation. They asked the Council to visit again with one its pest controllers. Mr and Mrs X also arranged for a private pest controller, pest controller A, to attend at the same time.
12. The Council agreed but then had to cancel the visit at the last minute. Pest controller A still attended. Mr and Mrs X visited the Council’s offices on the same day and spoke to a manager. They said pest controller A said the smell was coming from rats. The manager reviewed Mr and Mrs X’s information and spoke to pest controller A. Pest controller A clarified they did not believe the smell was coming from rats. The Council said there was no evidence of an infestation. The records show Mr X offered to remove floorboards to assist the Council. The Council agreed to re-visit Mr and Mrs X’s home.
13. The Council’s investigating officer and their manager carried out a second visit a few days later. Mr X removed a floorboard and discovered a dead rat. The Council’s records show it considered the rat to be too old to be evidence of a live infestation. The Council found no evidence of an infestation and no smell.
14. Mr and Mrs X continued to report issues to the Council over the next few months. Several months later they asked the Council to visit the property again. Two officers from the Council visited Mr and Mrs X’s home. Mr and Mrs X told them a pest controller from another company, pest controller B, would be joining the meeting but was running late. Mr X lifted more floorboards. The Council’s records show it saw no evidence of an infestation. The Council officers had to leave before pest controller B arrived.
15. The Council wrote to Mr and Mrs X setting out the steps it had taken so far. It said it could only take action if it found evidence of a live infestation. It said it was waiting on information from pest controller B. Pest controller B’s report said they believed rats were coming from next door. Mr and Mrs X continued to contact the Council. They said the Council had forced them to remove floorboards in their home. The Council logged their feedback as a stage one complaint.
16. In its complaint response the Council said it had investigated Mr and Mrs X’s claims fairly. It said it had reviewed pest controller B’s report but there was no evidence to support their belief rats were coming from next door. The Council clarified that it had not asked Mr X to remove floorboards, and it was open to Mr and Mrs X to take their own action against their neighbour under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
17. Mr and Mrs X continued to complain to the Council. They said the Council had ignored their evidence and forced pest controller A to change their mind about the cause of the smell. The Council responded at stage two of its complaint process. It maintained there was no evidence of an infestation. Mr and Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman.

My findings

18. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
19. The Council visited Mr and Mrs X’s property three times. It reviewed the information Mr and Mrs X provided, including information from other pest controllers. While pest controller B said they believed the infestation was coming from next door, the Council found no evidence to support this claim.
20. I have considered the steps the Council took to investigate Mr and Mrs X’s reports of a rat infestation, and the information it took account of when deciding to take no further action. There is no fault in how the Council took the decision, and I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong. The Council was not at fault.
21. Mr and Mrs X can take private action against their neighbour in the magistrates’ court. If the court decides they are suffering a statutory nuisance, it can order their neighbour to take action to stop or limit it.

Back to top

Decision

22. I find no fault and have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman