Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that there was fault in the Council’s process when he reported his accommodation provider was evicting him from his temporary accommodation. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr B, complained that there was fault in the Council’s process when he reported his accommodation provider was evicting him from his temporary accommodation. Mr B told us his mental health, his relationship and his work performance were detrimentally affected by what happened.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the information Mr B provided and given him an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council has considered the eviction process the accommodation provider followed. In its response to Mr B’s complaint the Council said there appeared to be no fault with it. The Council reached this view after considering all the details Mr B provided and its own records. It taken account of the matters we would expect it to consider so there is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making process. That means we cannot question whether the Council’s conclusion was right or wrong.
6. After Mr B had informed the Council he was to be evicted, the Council confirmed to his legal advisors it had found new accommodation for him.
7. Mr B has criticised how the accommodation provider dealt with the removal of his possessions. But the Council told him it could not reach a view on whether the accommodation provider, a third party, was liable for the damage to his possessions. The Council told Mr B the terms and conditions of his accommodation booking were between him and the accommodation provider.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman