Recent statements in this category are shown below:
-
London Borough of Haringey (24 019 176)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 08-May-2025
Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s rejection of a Right to Buy application. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner.
-
Uttlesford District Council (24 021 515)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 07-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about changes to the Right to Buy scheme. We cannot investigate complaints about the Council’s management of social housing.
-
London Borough of Hackney (24 020 925)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 06-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to preserve the right to buy. This is because it is reasonable for Mr X to take court action, and we have no jurisdiction to investigate complaints about social housing tenancies.
-
London Borough of Waltham Forest (24 020 414)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 30-Apr-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the application date used by the Council when determining the complainant’s Right to Buy application. There is insufficient evidence of administrative fault by the Council, and it is reasonable to expect the complainant to use the alternative court remedy available to him.
-
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (24 020 704)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 29-Apr-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of the Right to Buy process. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to use the alternative court remedy which is available.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 24-Apr-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to accept the complainant submitted a Right to Buy application to buy his home in October. The Council confirms it has no record of the application and we consider further investigation will not lead to a different outcome. Mr X wants the Council to honour the previous maximum discount on a new application. This is not something we can achieve.
-
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (24 018 495)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 22-Apr-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms X’s Council tenancy and ‘right to buy’ application. The law prevents us investigating the tenancy matters. The refusal of the ‘right to buy’ application is too closely related to the tenancy point for us to consider it. It is also reasonable to expect Ms X to use her right to go to court.
-
Sheffield City Council (24 017 306)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 24-Mar-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about delay in the Right to Buy procedure. There is a statutory process for tenants to follow where there is delay in the Right to Buy process. It was reasonable for Mr X to use this process, and if he remained unhappy, to go to court.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 017 698)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 13-Mar-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays and the valuation in the Right to Buy process. It is reasonable for the complainant to go to court, and to have pursued any dispute about the valuation with the District Valuer.
-
Slough Borough Council (24 016 505)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 26-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays when Mr X bought his home from the Council. Part of the complaint is late without good reason to investigate it now. Mr X could reasonably have served Delay Notices to protect his position. Mr X could reasonably have taken court action about the delay when he had the right. Mr X could also reasonably take court action for the compensation he seeks.