Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council allegedly breaching a tenancy agreement after renting a house from a landlord. It would be reasonable to take court action.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council did not honour the tenancy agreement it signed with a landlord Miss X acts for. She says this resulted in added expense dealing with repairs and a loss of rent. Miss X also complains the Council did not deal properly with her formal complaint.

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. 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)
3. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The complaint concerns a house the Council rented under a tenancy agreement with the owner. The Council used the house for people it owed homelessness duties.
7. The courts can consider whether a tenant has honoured a tenancy agreement, so the restriction in paragraph 2 applies. I appreciate there might be a cost to court action, but that in itself does not automatically make it unreasonable to expect someone to take court action.
8. It is more suitable for the courts than the Ombudsman to decide whether parties have properly performed duties under a contract such as a tenancy agreement. Here, this would include: whether the Council properly told the landlord about problems during the tenancy; which of the repairs should have been the responsibility of the Council rather than the landlord; whether certain items amounted to damage the Council should repair rather than wear and tear the landlord should deal with; and whether the Council did its repairs properly.
9. Miss X wants compensation for the cost of repairs. This is essentially a claim for damages. Miss X also refers to losing rent because while the landlord was completing repairs before looking for new tenants, the Council paid rent at the rate in the tenancy agreement, not at the market rate. This point is a claim of consequential/economic loss. Those are all legal matters that are not necessarily straightforward. It is more appropriate for the courts to consider those points.
10. In all the circumstances, I consider it would be reasonable to take court action. Therefore I shall not investigate this complaint.
11. Miss X is also dissatisfied with the Council’s complaint-handling. She reports the Council has not replied to her 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.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it would be reasonable to take court action regarding the Council’s alleged breaches of the tenancy agreement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman