Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the application date used by the Council when determining the complainant’s Right to Buy application. There is insufficient evidence of administrative fault by the Council, and it is reasonable to expect the complainant to use the alternative court remedy available to him.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the application date used by the Council when determining his Right to Buy (RTB) application. Mr X believes he is entitled to the higher discount which applied prior to 21 November 2024, as he had attempted to email his application to the Council before this date.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of administrative fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. The law also 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

4. I considered information provided by Mr X, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X attempted to email his RTB application to the Council on 20 November 2024. But the next morning, he realised the email had not been delivered as he had typed the email address incorrectly. Mr X printed off his application instead, and posted it to the Council on 26 November.
6. The Council says it is legally required to apply the discount rate based on the date it received the application, which was after the discount level had changed.
7. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made. In this case, the Council appears to have followed the Right to Buy process correctly, so there is insufficient evidence of administrative fault to justify starting an investigation.
8. Furthermore, the Housing Act 1985 carries a provision for RTB applicants who to challenge any matters arising during the process in the County Court. With reference to paragraph 3 above, if Mr X believes he has grounds to challenge the application date used by the Council, the Ombudsman would normally consider it reasonable to expect him to use this alternative court remedy.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of administrative fault, and it is reasonable to expect him to use the alternative court remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman