Council house sales and leaseholders


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Wandsworth (18 018 642)

    Statement Upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 29-Oct-2019

    Summary: Miss D complained about the Council's handling of her Right to Buy application between September 2018 and March 2019. The Council was at fault. Its poor internal communication led to the Council wrongly serving Miss D and her brother Mr E with a notice to quit the property and threaten them with eviction. It then obtained incorrect legal advice from its solicitors which caused it to incorrectly withdraw the Right to Buy application. The Council agreed to pay Miss D and Mr E a total of £500 to recognise the distress, uncertainty and time and trouble the faults caused them.

  • London Borough of Tower Hamlets (18 012 138)

    Statement Not upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 18-Oct-2019

    Summary: Ms D complains that the Council has not properly dealt with the purchase of her flat. The Council was not at fault.

  • Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (19 001 608)

    Statement Upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 17-Oct-2019

    Summary: The Council failed to deduct rent paid from the purchase price of a right to buy flat although the purchaser had served an operative notice of delay. The Council also failed to reply to a complaint. The Council accepts it made errors and will reimburse rent to the purchaser and reply to her complaint. It will also apologise to her and pay her £100 for her unnecessary time and trouble.

  • London Borough of Tower Hamlets (18 019 607)

    Statement Upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 30-Sep-2019

    Summary: There was fault by the Council. It took too long to complete the sale of the leasehold interest to Miss B under the right to buy scheme. It sent wrongly dated letters and it failed to deal with her complaint in accordance with its complaints process. This caused Miss B distress and frustration and she had to renew her mortgage offer and pay more that she should have. The Council has apologised to Miss B and offered to pay her £10,495. It will also share this decision with its relevant officers reminding them that letters should be properly dated, and staff should follow the complaints process.

  • Wolverhampton City Council (18 009 996)

    Statement Upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 06-Mar-2019

    Summary: The Council failed to provide an information document about Right to Buy when Miss X started her tenancy. This did not cause Miss X any significant injustice because the Council did tell her that she might not receive a discount if she applied to buy her home.

  • Dacorum Borough Council (18 008 503)

    Statement Not upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 07-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained that after a data breach, the Council refused to waive the repayable discount on her property which she bought under the Right to Buy scheme. There was no fault in the Council's actions.

  • Exeter City Council (18 006 822)

    Statement Upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 18-Dec-2018

    Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain the Council unreasonably delayed the completion of their 'right to buy' application. There was fault by the Council that warrants a remedy to reflect the additional time and trouble Mr and Mrs X spent pursuing the application and their complaints.

  • Manchester City Council (18 009 719)

    Statement Not upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 20-Nov-2018

    Summary: Ms X complains about the purchase price offered by the Council under the Right to Buy. The Ombudsman has discontinued our investigation because there is no fault causing injustice to Ms X and we cannot achieve the outcome Ms X wants.

  • London Borough Of Brent (18 007 388)

    Statement Not upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 15-Nov-2018

    Summary: Mr W complains the Council did not tell him about a shared equity scheme. Mr W says as a result he was not able to apply for the scheme and missed out on the opportunity. Mr W also complains the Council has not offered him a replacement property. The Ombudsman finds no evidence of fault with the Council's actions.

  • Portsmouth City Council (17 020 240)

    Statement Upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 19-Oct-2018

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council would not start his second Right to Buy process until he had sent them details of his finances. There was fault by the Council in how it dealt with Mr X's first Right to Buy application. It was fault that the Council did not reply to Mr X's queries about the maintenance and service charges for the property. That fault caused Mr X an injustice requiring a remedy. Mr X did not submit a valid second Right to Buy application. It was not fault by the Council which stopped that application progressing.