Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s housing circumstances. The law prevents us considering the management of social housing or residential long leases. Parts of the complaint are late without good reason to investigate them now. We are unlikely to reach a clear enough view on some points now. There was no fault in the Council refusing the recent housing applications. It is reasonable to expect Mr X go to court about his rights to land and property.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about matters related to his housing circumstances.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. We cannot investigate complaints about the management of housing let on a long lease by a council that is a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraphs 5A and 5B, schedule 5, as amended)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. 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)
6. 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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and copy complaint correspondence from the Council. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Many of the events Mr X refers to date back many years. Mr X complained to us in March 2023, so the restriction in paragraph 4 applies to events before March 2022. Mr X could reasonably have complained sooner if he was dissatisfied about those events and their impact on his housing. So I am not persuaded there are good reasons to accept the late complaint about those events. Also, even if the restriction in paragraph 4 did not apply, or if there were good reasons to accept a late complaint about them, it is unlikely we will be able to reach a clear enough view now on the balance of probabilities about events dating back some years. For that reason also, we will not investigate events before March 2022.
9. Much of the complaint turns on Mr X’s belief the Council has infringed his ‘indigenous rights’ to land and property as a ‘burgess’ of the borough, including by not housing him. He wants the Council to acknowledge his rights as a ‘burgess.’
10. As far as this concerns the redevelopment of an estate, the Council acted as a registered provider of social housing. Its actions concerned the management of social housing and residential long leases. So, as paragraph 3 explained, we cannot investigate those actions.
11. As far as this concerns Mr X’s personal legal rights, the Council denies any breach. This point is fundamentally a disagreement between the Council and Mr X about legal rights to land and property. The courts can deal with such matters, so the restriction in paragraph 5 applies here. There might be a cost to court action, but that does not in itself automatically make it unreasonable to expect someone to go to court. Here, there is a disagreement about legal interpretation. That is for the courts, not the Ombudsman. So we shall not investigate this point.
12. Mr X says the Council misled him into believing it had referred him to temporary accommodation. I understand that concerns events in 2021. There is no sign the Council ever accepted it owed Mr X a legal duty that would involve arranging temporary accommodation. So this point appears to be about what the Council might have said to Mr X, or what Mr X might have understood. It is unlikely we could reach a clear enough view about that now.
13. Mr X says the Council’s housing register system prevents him getting social housing he is entitled to. The Council says it has no evidence of a housing register application Mr X says he made four or five years ago. Investigation is unlikely to give us a clear enough view of that point now. Mr X also applied for housing in December 2022 and March 2023. The Council refused those applications as Mr X’s circumstances did not meet its housing allocation policy’s conditions for joining the housing register. The Council must follow its policy. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council refusing those applications.
14. Mr X is also unhappy with the Council’s handling of his complaint. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.
15. Mr X says the Council committed misconduct in public office and fraud. Those are alleged crimes, which are for the police to consider, not the Ombudsman.
16. Mr X wants compensation for various problems he says the Council’s faults have caused him. The Ombudsman does not seek compensation for damages. That is a legal matter more appropriately for the courts to decide.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. The law prevents us considering the management of social housing or residential long leases. Parts of the complaint are late without good reason to investigate them now. We are unlikely to reach a clear enough view on some points now. There was no fault in the refusal of the recent housing applications. It is reasonable to expect Mr X go to court about his rights to land and property. Alleged crimes are for the police. It would be disproportionate to investigate the Council’s complaint-handling in isolation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman