Summary: We will not investigate the Council’s handling of Mr X’s Right to Buy application. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to use the legal notice of delay procedure and, if needed, to take the Council to court. We will also not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council wrongly claimed solar panels were not fixtures and fittings. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision and in any case, this is a matter better dealt with by the courts.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council delayed in handling his Right to Buy (RTB) application for over 18 months. He also claims the Council is acting unlawfully by imposing the terms of a previous tenancy agreement on him in relation to solar panels on the property’s roof.
2. Mr X says that as a result of this, he had been caused financial hardship and distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could have taken the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to have gone to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
5. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. There is a strict procedure with time limits for each stage of the RTB process. The procedure also provides for an applicant to serve a ‘notice of delay’ on the Council if they consider it is delaying the sale.
9. The Council must either move along the sale or send a counter notice to the tenant explaining what action it has taken or explain why it cannot progress the sale. If the Council does not reply within a month the tenant can complete a ‘operative notice of delay’ form. Any rent the tenant pays while waiting for the Council’s response can be taken off the sale price.
10. 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 makes provision for an applicant to ask the Court to decide any issue/disputes arising during their application to purchase.
11. The law expressly provides this route for RTB disputes, so we normally expect people to use it. 
12. I consider it reasonable for Mr X to use the notice of delay process and, if necessary, to go to court, to resolve his concerns. Therefore, we will not investigate this matter.
13. The Council has decided that the solar panels are not fixtures and fittings and it owns them. In making this decision, it has considered the relevant information and taken legal advice. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision, which means we cannot question the outcome.
14. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision. The fundamental issue is whether he is bound by a contractual agreement made by a previous tenant and the Council. The courts are better placed to consider contractual disputes. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it was reasonable for him to use the notice of delay procedure, and if needed, to take the Council to court. In relation to the matter of the solar panels, the courts are better placed to consider contractual disputes.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman