Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the complainant’s Right to Buy application. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have used the legal remedies available to her.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Miss B, has complained about issues that arose while she was buying a leasehold property under the Right to Buy legislation. In summary, she says delay and errors by the Council may affect her ability to sublet the property and reduce its resale value. She also says she suffered a financial loss as a result of delays in the process.

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. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
4. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if, for example, we believe:

• 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered what Miss B said in her complaint.

Back to top

What I found

Background

6. Section 181 of the Housing Act 1985 sets out the Right to Buy process. The Act allows tenants to serve an ‘initial notice of delay’ form if they consider the council is holding up the sale. The council must then either move the sale along within a month or send a counter notice to the tenant. The counter notice will explain what action the council has already taken or explain why it cannot progress the sale.
7. If the council does not reply within a month, the tenant can complete an ‘operative notice of delay’ form. Any rent the tenant pays while waiting for the council’s response can be taken off the sale price.
8. If a council still does not act on notices of delay, a tenant may take their dispute to the County Court, under section 181 of the Housing Act. This provides for the Court to decide any question about the Right to Buy process.
9. The County Court may also decide any other disputes arising from the right to buy. These include disputes about the size of a discount offered or the terms of a lease.
10. A Court of Appeal has decided the County Court cannot decide any dispute once the sale has completed unless there was some prior agreement for the parties to resolve a particular dispute after completion. (Hanoman v LB of Southwark (No2_) [2008] EWCA Civ 624)

Analysis

11. I consider there was a specific procedure within the 1985 Act for Miss B to deal with any issue of delay. Further, she had a court remedy under Section 181 of the 1985 Act for any dispute arising from the purchase (except the valuation) including the terms of the lease. Miss B was legally represented and I see no reason she should not have used the remedies available to her.
12. Miss B may have lost her court remedy when she agreed to buy the property on the terms offered by the Council but I do not consider this means it was not reasonable for her to have used that remedy before completion. I do not consider we can or should seek to resolve those issues now.

Back to top

Final decision

13. I have decided we will not investigate this complaint for the reasons set out in paragraphs 11 and 12.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman