Leicester City Council (25 018 688)

Category : Housing > Council house sales and leaseholders

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 20 Mar 2026

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s cancellation of a ‘right to buy’ application. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to use his right to take court action.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains the Council wrongly cancelled his ‘right to buy’ application. He says it should reconsider its decision because his personal circumstances changed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. 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 Mr X and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X applied to buy his home from the Council. The Council issued a section 125 notice setting out the offer of sale to Mr X and the other applicants. The applicants’ personal circumstances then changed. The Council cancelled the sale and explained it could not amend the application after the section 125 notice had been issued. The Council told Mr X that if he wanted to buy his home, he would need to apply again.
  2. The law allows the county court to decide any dispute about the right to buy (Housing Act 1985, section 181). Mr X can ask the court to decide if the Council should have cancelled his application. The court can make a binding order. So, the restriction in paragraph 3 applies to this complaint. As the law expressly provides this route for resolving such disputes, we normally expect applicants to use it, with legal advice if necessary. There might be some cost to court action, but that does not automatically make taking court action unreasonable, particularly in the context of a transaction for a valuable asset such as Mr X's home. The court is better placed than the Ombudsman to decide whether the Council was wrong to close Mr X’s ‘right to buy’ application.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable for him to use his right to take court action.

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