Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council did not respond properly to the complainant’s complaint about the landlord licensing scheme. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, complains that the Council did not respond properly after she complained she was made to do unnecessary repairs to a property that she rents to tenants. She would like an apology and compensation.

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 an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I invited Mrs X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs X owns a property which she rents to tenants. The Council inspected the property as part of the landlord licensing scheme. The inspection did not reveal any significant hazards but some repairs were identified. These included completing an electrical check, installing smoke alarms with a ten year battery, providing a handrail on the stairs, boxing in the utility meters, and sealing some holes.
5. Mrs X acted swiftly to complete most of the work. The Council did a second visit and confirmed that she had met the licensing requirements.
6. However, an officer then sent Mrs X an email stating she had not done the repairs and the case would be passed for enforcement. Mrs X complained. She also complained that an officer had told her the works had not been necessary. Mrs X asked for compensation.
7. The Council apologised for the conflicting information. It confirmed she had done the work but a lack of coordination between two systems, and different officers, had led to the email saying Mrs X’s case would be passed for enforcement. It said it had updated its system to stop this happening again. The Council confirmed that the repairs Mrs X had completed were necessary and that the appropriateness of the repairs had been confirmed by a senior officer. The Council explained why each of the repairs were needed. The Council declined Mrs X’s request for compensation.

Assessment

8. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
9. The Council responded appropriately to Mrs X’s complaint. It confirmed that she had satisfied the licensing conditions by completing the repairs. It explained why the repairs were needed and said that a senior officer had checked and agreed that all the repairs were needed.
10. The communication between the Council and Mrs X could have been better. A lack of coordination between different systems led to the Council sending Mrs X an email saying she had not complied with the repair request. This, however, has not caused an injustice which requires an investigation. This is because the Council has confirmed her property is compliant, it apologised and explained it has taken steps to improve its systems. It has also confirmed the repairs were necessary and there is nothing in the list of repairs which is excessive or unusual.

Back to top

Final decision

11. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault or injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman