Summary: We have decided to stop investigating this complaint about the way the Council dealt with Miss X’s concerns about damp, mould and foul smells originating from a neighbouring flat. This is because the complaint was made to us late, and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate it now.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the way the Council dealt with her concerns about damp and mould, as well as foul smells, which she says were originating from a neighbouring flat. She disagrees with the Council’s conclusions and says it took too long to address the matter.
2. Miss X says the Council’s failings had a negative impact on both her health and her daughter’s health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

7. Miss X contacted the Council in early 2024 to report foul smells rising into her flat from the property below.
8. The Council visited Miss X’s property in February. The officer did not identify a sewage-type smell but noted a musty odour.
9. Miss X provided medical evidence indicating a professional view that her daughter’s health was being adversely affected by her environment. The Council then agreed to serve notice on the occupier of the flat below in order to carry out an inspection.
10. An environmental health officer inspected Miss X’s flat in April. He did not detect any smell and took damp readings, concluding there was no evidence of damp or mould.
11. The officer also inspected the neighbouring flat below. He noted there had been some flooding in a bedroom but concluded this had not affected Miss X’s property.
12. In August, Miss X complained that the Council had taken too long to inspect the neighbouring flat and she disagreed with its conclusions. She said that the tenant had been moved out of the flat so that works could be carried out.
13. The Council sent its final response to Miss X’s complaint in September 2024. It said the officer found no evidence of a statutory nuisance or any housing hazards which met the threshold for enforcement action against the landlord.
14. The Council also said it would carry out a further visit if Miss X provided clarification about what she wanted the officer to inspect.

Analysis

15. As explained in paragraph three, we do not usually investigate complaints where the complainant has been aware of the issue for more than 12 months.
16. Miss X complained to us around 15 months after the Council concluded there were no hazards in her flat and no evidence of a statutory nuisance, and around 11 months after she received the Council’s final response to her complaint.
17. Miss X has not provided evidence to suggest problems in her property continued which the Council failed to address. Nor has she given reasons why she did not complain to us sooner. I therefore do not consider there are grounds to exercise discretion to investigate Miss X’s complaint about matters she became aware of more than 12 months before she submitted her complaint to us.

Back to top

Decision

18. I have decided to discontinue my investigation of this complaint because it was made late, and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate it now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman