Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about delay in the right to buy process, and ownership of a strip of land to the side of the property. This is because it is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted the Ombudsman sooner, and it is not the Ombudsman’s role to adjudicate in boundary disputes.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs B, says the Council delayed in processing her right to buy application, and she is confused about who owns a strip of land to the side of her property.

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 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 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)

4. And 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered:
• Mrs B’s complaint to the Ombudsman;
• Information from the Council about Mrs B’s purchase of the property, including a copy of the title plan.
6. I also gave Mrs B the opportunity to comment on a draft version of this statement.

Back to top

What I found

7. The 12-month time restriction detailed in paragraph 4 above applies to the complaint. This is because Mrs B purchased the property through the right to buy scheme in August 2016, yet she did not contact the Ombudsman until June 2019. If Mrs B was concerned about delay in the purchase process, or was confused about the extent of the title, then I would expect her to have raised these issues at the time of purchase.
8. Furthermore, it is not the Ombudsman’s role to adjudicate in boundary disputes, so I do not see that an investigation by the Ombudsman would resolve Mrs B’s confusion about the land ownership. Rather, Mrs B should seek legal advice for assistance with the interpretation of the title plan.
9. For these reasons, I do not consider the Ombudsman should investigate Mrs B’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint. This is because it is reasonable to expect her to have complained to the Ombudsman sooner, and it is not the Ombudsman’s role to adjudicate in boundary disputes.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman