Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaint that the Council failed to respond to her claim. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council in this case because it has responded to Ms B’s legal advisor and her claim is a legal matter.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Ms B, complained that the Council failed to respond to a claim she made that the Council failed to advise her of structural defects in the house she purchased in 2009 under the right to buy. Ms B says she is now unable to sell the house and it is worth nothing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. 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 we would find fault, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered the information Ms B and the Council have provided and Ms B’s comments on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. After admitting Ms B’s right to buy, the Council sent a re-offer notice to her in July 2009. Offer notices must give details of the purchase price and other matters including structural defects the Council knows to exist. The offer notice the council issued in this case set out structural defects in the house. But Ms B complains that the Council failed to advise her of some structural defects which she did not become aware of until much later.
5. In her correspondence with the Council Ms B says she telephoned in the Council in September 2018 after receiving details of a survey of her house. She says she made four further attempts to follow up her call but no-one returned her calls. So she emailed the Council in November 2018 seeking a response as a matter of urgency.
6. In December 2018 Ms B told the Council she had been told the house was of non-standard construction and not mortgageable. She also asked the Council why it was taking so long to respond. Ms B then sought legal advice. Her legal advisor wrote to the Council in February 2019. The Council replied saying it needed more information in order to provide a substantive response. Ms B’s legal advisor sent further information to the Council in May 2019. In June 2019 the Council replied to Ms B’s legal advisor. It said the claim they were making on behalf of Ms B was out of time because the statutory limitation period was six years from the cause of action (July 2009).
7. Ms B’s complaint to us is that the Council has failed to respond to her claim. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council in this respect because it has responded to Ms B’s legal advisor.
8. Ms B is seeking compensation from the Council. She is alleging negligence by the Council has caused her financial loss. This is a legal matter and we cannot rule on matters of legal liability. We would not investigate a complaint about the way a council has dealt with a complaint if we are not investigating the substantive matter which gave rise to it.

Back to top

Final decision

9. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council as it has responded to Ms B’s legal advisor and her claim is a legal matter.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman