London Borough of Lambeth (23 011 346)

Category : Housing > Council house sales and leaseholders

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 30 Nov 2023

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay in the complainant’s right to buy application. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to use her right to go to court to resolve the disputed issue.

The complaint

  1. Miss X says the purchase of her home under the Right to Buy (RTB) process has been delayed because the Council says there is no legal requirement to provide the fire safety information being requested by some mortgage lenders.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council, which included their complaint correspondence.
  2. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Under section 181 of the Housing Act 1985, a RTB applicant has the right to go to the county court about any problem or dispute about their application (except about the valuation, which is not relevant in this case). So, at any time during the claimed delay, Miss X has had the right to ask the court to order the Council to end the delay and progress the sale. The Council would have the chance to put forward a defence, and the court could decide the matter. So, the restriction in paragraph 2 applies to this complaint.
  2. As the law expressly provides this court route for such difficulties with the RTB process, we normally expect people to use that right. Court action might have cost implications. However, Miss X could ask the court for her costs if her action succeeds. Also, in the context of a transaction for a valuable asset such as Miss X’s home, the potential cost of court action does not, in itself, make it unreasonable to expect her to take that action. For these reasons, I consider it reasonable to expect Miss X to go to court about the delay caused by the disputed issue.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect her to pursue a court remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings