Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s advice to Mr X’s tenant concerning the eviction process following the serving of a possession notice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about advice given by a Council officer to his tenant about remaining in his property following the serving of a section 21 notice to quit. He says the Council encouraged the tenant to enter into litigation and delayed his attempt to move new tenants into the property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X served a section 21 notice on his tenant to begin ending the tenancy. The tenant sought advice from Shelter when she was told the property was required for new tenants who would be moving in shortly. She was advised that the notice did not end the tenancy and she retained statutory rights to remain in the property until a court issued a possession order and warrant for her eviction.
6. The tenant became concerned that she may be evicted against her rights and contacted the Council. The Council’s homeless section confirmed to her that she retained the right to remain in the property after the notice and any attempts to harass her or move her out before a court order and against her will would be breaking the law.
7. Mr X complained about the attitude of the officers. He told the tenant she would be liable for damages and loss of rental from the new tenants if she remained resident. The Council again stressed the tenant’s rights under housing legislation and that although she may be liable for court costs, other costs may not apply.
8. The provisions of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 and Housing Act 1988 require Councils to give advice to tenants who are faced with eviction and possible harassment which are criminal acts. I can see nothing in the advice which the Council gave to the tenant and repeated to Mr X as landlord which could be seen as other than meeting the Council’s duties in these matters.
9. When considering complaints, we may not question the merits of the decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Councils’ officers or members. Instead, we focus on the process by which the decision was made. This means we will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s advice to Mr X’s tenant concerning the eviction process following the serving of a possession notice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman