Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr Y’s complaint about the resurfacing works carried out by the Council. This is because estate management matters cannot be investigated by the Ombudsman.

The complaint

1. Mr Y says the Council carried out some resurfacing works in his street. However, the work was to a poor standard and the Council tried to charge him more than what was originally agreed.

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 housing let on a long lease by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5B, schedule 5, as amended)
4. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. As part of my assessment I have:

• considered the complaint by Mr Y and the correspondence he exchanged with the Council; and
• issued a draft decision inviting Mr Y to reply.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr Y says he lives in a street with terraced townhouses. The Council owns the freehold to four of these houses. The owners of the other houses own the freehold to their properties.
8. Mr Y has also said the title deeds for the properties say the Council is responsible for maintaining the road on the street with a compulsory contribution from the other freeholders. This means the houses are part of a social housing estate.
9. Mr Y has complained in 2016 the Council told all the freeholders it was going to resurface the road and charge the freeholders. The work went ahead against his will and finished in March 2018. However, when it was finished Mr Y says it was to a poor standard. He also says the Council then charged him more than what it had said it would cost him.
10. When Mr Y complained the Council reduced Mr Y’s bill but said the work it had done was to a good standard.
11. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint brought by Mr Y. This is because any issues regarding the provision or management of social housing, including the management or repair of communal areas and estate roads, is not for the Ombudsman to investigate.
12. I recognise Mr Y’s property is privately owned. But it is part of a social housing estate, which has the same meaning as in Part 2 of the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008. This means that Mr Y’s property would come under this definition.
13. Mr Y has also said the reason the Council resurfaced the road outside the property is because of a clause in the title deeds. This therefore makes the dispute a contractual matter. As a result, it would be reasonable for Mr Y to make an appeal to the Property Chamber (First Tier Tribunal) against the charges.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman