Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s reports of harassment and anti-social behaviour by her neighbours and the impact warning letters sent to her about her own behaviour had on her housing banding priority. This is because past events fall outside our jurisdiction due to the passage of time and there is insufficient evidence to suggest fault in the Council’s handling of her more recent request for a management transfer move or that her case be treated as an exception to the lettings policy.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council dismissed her complaints of racially aggravated harassment and anti-social behaviour by her neighbours. She says false reports made against her led to warning letters being unfairly issued to her about her own behaviour and that she was put in the lowest priority banding as a result.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. 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)
5. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant, including the Council’s response to her complaint.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. The time restriction highlighted at paragraph 3 applies to past events over 12 months old from the time the complainant first became aware of them. This is because we would reasonably have expected Ms X to have complained to us sooner about the Council’s response to her reports made in past years about her neighbours’ behaviour, her own behaviour and its impact on her banding. These past events happened too long ago to be investigated now.
9. The Council more recently considered Ms X’s request for a management transfer or that it treat her case as an exception to the lettings policy because of the problems which exist with her neighbours. Having considered the evidence available, and spoken to the police, the Council decided that Ms X did not meet the relevant criteria for an urgent management move or a move to a higher banding. While this is disappointing for Ms X, there is insufficient evidence to suggest fault affected the Council’s decision and we will not investigate the matter.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because past events fall outside our jurisdiction due to the passage of time and there is insufficient evidence to suggest fault in the Council’s handling of her more recent request for a management transfer move or that her case be treated as an exception to the lettings policy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman