Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council caused the complainant to lose out on a Right to Buy discount as it is unlikely we will find fault plus the decision on the complainant’s entitlement to discount is a decision ultimately for the courts.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council did not inform him about Government changes to the Right to Buy (RTB) scheme that would significantly reduce the amount of discount he would be entitled to when buying his council home. Mr X wants the Council to reinstate his application from 2024 which would entitle him to the higher discount.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We 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. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X submitted a RTB application in February 2024 but did not proceed as he says the Council informed him that RTB discounts were to be increased by the Government in April of that year so it would be beneficial for him to wait.
7. Mr X contacted the Council again in July 2025 whereupon he was told due to changes brought about by the Government in November 2024, the discount he was entitled to on the purchase price of his home was significantly reduced.
8. Mr X says he acted on the Council’s information in early 2024 in good faith and was not told that the discount might reduce in future or that there were any risks involved in delaying the application.
9. I recognise Mr X remains unhappy about what took place, but we will not investigate as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council. I appreciate that Mr X did not proceed with his purchase in early 2024 following information the Council supplied to him, but it was his own choice to do this and to not proceed with the purchase promptly after the discount increased in April 2024.
10. Mr X did not take the issue up again until over a year later and in doing this, Mr X himself risked the introduction of further changes to the scheme that might prejudice him. The Council was not to know what changes the Government was to introduce during this time or of its plans to introduce a cap. The Government announced the discount cap on 30 October 2024 and this came into effect on 21 November 2024. I recognise Mr X feels the Council should have informed him of the discount cap but given the speed at which this took place and as Mr X had not been in touch with the Council about his RTB for well over a year, I consider it is unlikely we would find the Council at fault for not doing this.
11. Notwithstanding the above, we cannot re-instate Mr X’s discount. If Mr X has received a Section 125 Notice (offer notice) he has the right under Section 181 of the Housing Act 1985 to ask the County Court to decide his entitlement to RTB discount. As this is the procedure provided in law, it is reasonable to expect Mr X to use it to obtain a legal decision on his discount entitlement.
12. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council and ultimately a decision on Mr X’s discount entitlement is a matter for the court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman