Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s actions when she reported a bed bug infestation to it. We found fault because the Council failed to act in a decisive and timely manner throughout the process. It also failed to adequately communicate with her in both its general communication and its complaint responses. This caused Mrs X significant avoidable distress, frustration and uncertainty. To remedy the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mrs X and share guidance with relevant officers.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s actions relating to a bed bug infestation in a neighbouring property managed by it. She complains the Council was too slow to act when she reported the issues to it and that pest control visits were delayed. She also complains of poor communication from the Council.
2. Mrs X says this has caused her distress and frustration. She says this has also impacted her financially as she paid for pest control visits to the neighbouring property when the Council did not act.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. My investigation begins when Mrs X says she first contacted the Council on 21 March 2024.
7. My investigation ends when bed bug treatment was finished at the property next to Mrs X’s in mid-October 2024. This is after Mrs X came to us in September 2024 to register her complaint, however, I am satisfied it is relevant to include this period in my investigation.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I have considered all the information Mrs X provided. I have also asked the Council questions and requested information, and in turn have considered the Council’s response.
9. Mrs X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I have taken any comments received into consideration before reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

10. Mrs X’s home is next to a property which the Council leases from a private landlord (Property A). The houses are attached.
11. On 21 March 2024, Mrs X called the Council regarding bed bugs from Property A coming through to her home. Mrs X says she was told the issue would be raised with the pest control team.
12. On 28 March, Mrs X contacted a local pest control company she had used since January (Company J). Company J provided a report which said it thought the cause of the bed bug infestation was in Property A. It found a high level of infestation which it estimated had been there for around a year. The technician advised he had sprayed Property A whilst inspecting it and that all carpets should be removed and the property be treated urgently. He charged Mrs X £310.

April 2024

13. On 3 April, Mrs X again called the Council. Mrs X says she was promised an update by the end of the day.
14. On 4 April, Mrs X sent an email to the Council’s pest control team to advise about the bed bug infestation. The team replied on the same day to advise it was out of their remit and had forwarded the issue to the private sector housing team.
15. On 10 April, the private sector housing team emailed Mrs X to say it was not in their remit and the matter had been passed back to the pest control team and also to the private sector leasing team.
16. Internal emails at the Council during the early part of April saw discussions between the various departments. By 11 April, the Council (Officer E) decided it would deal with the bed bug issue. The Council did not advise Mrs X of this.
17. Also on 11 April, Mrs X arranged for Company J to again treat Property A for the infestation. She paid another £310.
18. Mrs X sent a joint email to various teams at the Council about matters on 13 April. She advised of treatments she had already paid for and asked the Council to act.
19. By 17 April, further internal emails decided an investigation into the bed bugs at Property A would be needed. Officer E asked an officer responsible for void properties (Officer F) to assist with access.
20. On 18 April, Mrs X emailed the Council to make a complaint. She explained all of the above. She said she had been passed to various departments and nothing had happened. Mrs X said she would contact Company J again if nothing happened by 24 April and that this would lead to a third treatment meaning she had spent almost £1000. Mrs X sent the Council copies of her emails and Company J’s invoices. She asked for it to repay her what she had spent on treatments for Property A.
21. On 24 April, Mrs X emailed to chase the Council for a response after her email sent on 13 April.
22. Officer E replied on 25 April to update her. She advised she had contacted Officer F twice already but that she would ask him to contact Mrs X on 29 April about moving matters forward.
23. When Mrs X did not hear from Officer F, she emailed various people at the Council late on 29 April, including Officers E and F. She advised she would arrange for Company J to do a third treatment if she did not hear back from anybody by the end of the day on Friday 3 May.

May and June 2024

24. Mrs X arranged Company J to do a third treatment at Property A on 7 May.
25. After chasing the Council for her complaint response, it replied on 7 May to apologise. It said it needed more time and would respond by 20 May.
26. On 13 May, Mrs X’s MP received a reply to his contact about the issues. The Council said it was going out to assess Property A on 16 May. The MP shared this with Mrs X.
27. The Council sent its stage one complaint response on 20 May. It said:
• delays were due to the void surveyor being on annual leave;
• an officer had been in touch to update Mrs X;
• the pest control team had arranged a visit for 16 May and they would arrange any necessary treatment; and
• Mrs X would need to claim on her home insurance for the pest control invoices from Company J.
28. On 24 May, the Council emailed Ms X to confirm it had been out to Property A twice. Its technician stated there was no evidence of any infestation on either visit on 16 and 23 May. However, because evidence of bed bugs had been found along the party wall in Mrs X’s home, the technician recommended a two-visit course of treatment where both properties would be treated at the same time. The Council said it would contact Mrs X to confirm the date and time.
29. After further chases to the Council at the end of May and beginning of June, Mrs X contacted it to say the planned treatment of 10 June had gone ahead at her property but not next door. She said the operative had been unable to gain access as the key safe had been removed from Property A.
30. After further emails in mid-June, the Council told Mrs X it was passing the matter to Officer F to liaise with pest control, it repeated it would not be able to reimburse her for Company J’s costs.
31. Mrs X escalated her complaint to stage two of the Council’s process on 18 June. She remained unhappy because June’s treatment at Property A had not happened and people were now living in the property. She was also unhappy as she said the Council had taken too long to acknowledge her contacts.
32. On 19 June, Mrs X again advised the Council there were unauthorised occupants staying in Property A. On 24 June, the Council advised bedbug treatment would begin when the occupants had been removed.

July to October 2024

33. Mrs X chased for updates on 1, 3, 17, and 19 July.
34. On 18 July, the Council sent its stage two response. It said:
• two visits had been carried out to Property A with no live infestation found;
• it had agreed to treatments for both her property and Property A;
• Property A was treated on 10 July;
• it had investigated and found no evidence of an infestation at Property A and so it was unable to compensate her for treatments carried out to her private property; and
• this was the end of the complaint process and signposted her to the Ombudsman.
35. After a further chase on 24 July, the officer apologised for not responding to Mrs X’s early July chases and said Officer F would be in touch. Officer F emailed Mrs X on 26 July to say the occupants had been removed and he would be in touch when the property had been cleaned.
36. Mrs X chased the Council on 5, 8, 12, 16 and 20 August asking for updates as she had not heard any more about the treatments after Property A had become vacant on 11 July. She said bed bugs were still affecting her property and coming from Property A.
37. On 21 August, Mrs X emailed Officer E and asked for help to progress matters. The Council then involved Officer G. Officer G emailed Mrs X on 23 August to say treatments would take place on 30 August and 27 September.
38. The treatment on 30 August did not go ahead as the keys were not available for the pest control operative. Dates were rescheduled for 11 September and 2 October. 11 September’s treatment was successfully carried out. Officer G kept Mrs X updated.
39. The pest control operative was unable to carry out 2 October’s treatment as the keys were again not available for him to collect. It was rescheduled for and took place on 14 October. Officer G advised Mrs X the next day that there had been signs of bed bugs on visit one, but nothing by the time of visit two.

Analysis

Initial contact and visits to assess

40. Mrs X first called the Council about bed bug issues which she believed were related to Property A on 21 March. Although the Council has provided no evidence of the calls Mrs X says she made to it on 21 March and 3 April, I am satisfied that on the balance of probabilities it is more likely than not these calls were made.
41. Only after Mrs X emailed the Council on 4 April did matters begin to progress. There were initial emails to say it was not the responsibility of various departments. After 11 April, Mrs X then heard from the Council on 25 April to say Officer F had been asked to contact her. Mrs X then heard nothing more about any plans to visit the property until 13 May when her local MP passed on the Council’s response to him about the situation and explained the first assessment visit would be on 16 May.
42. In response to my enquiries, the Council said part of the delay in organising an assessment visit was due to the miscommunication about how and where to get Property A’s keys. The Council provided evidence that it took from 11 April to 10 May to organise gaining keys to access Property A after the decision had been made to deal with matters.
43. In the circumstances of this complaint, I am satisfied the Council allowed things to drift and took too long to arrange a visit to assess whether the infestation at Mrs X’s home was coming from Property A. Although the individual departments were at various times communicating with each other, this did not lead to consistent or timely updates to Mrs X despite her chases. It did not lead to a timely appointment to be made for the assessment. Mrs X was only told of the assessment appointments due to information shared by her MP, not the Council. I am satisfied communication could and should have been better. The delay and lack of communication is fault. It would have caused Mrs X significant avoidable distress, frustration and uncertainty. I have made a recommendation below to remedy this injustice.

Bed bug treatments at Property A

44. The Council said there was no evidence of a live infestation at Property A after its assessment visits on 16 and 20 May. Despite this, it agreed on 24 May to carry out two visits each to both Mrs X’s home and Property A to perform treatments.
45. Treatments would need to be carried out a maximum of a month apart from each other to be successful. Treatments were scheduled for 10 June and 8 July.
46. Due to the key safe at Property A having been removed and the pest control officer not being aware, a planned treatment at Property A on 10 June was not carried out.
47. Unauthorised occupancy of Property A from mid-June to mid-July meant the Council was unable to carry out the next scheduled treatment. However, it was only after chases from Mrs X throughout the second half of July that Officer F emailed her on 26 July to say the property needed to be cleaned and then he would update her.
48. Mrs X then chased the Council for updates on 5, 12, 16 and 20 August as she had heard no more since Officer F’s contact. This led to work by Officer G to move matters forward.
49. After further issues with key availability, the first treatment did not take place until 11 September.
50. Further key availability issues meant other appointments were cancelled and the second and final treatment took place on 14 October.
51. In response to my enquiries, the Council said that the apology for the delays offered by Officer G was because the key safe had been removed from the property and Officer G had to chase for the location of the keys.
52. Evidence shows that apart from a three-week period of unauthorised occupancy at Property A, it took the Council from 24 May when it agreed to treat the properties until 14 October to carry out the two treatments.
53. I acknowledge the overall efforts of Officers E and G to progress matters. However, I am satisfied that overall, the Council allowed things to drift and that there was a lack of urgency. There was a significant amount of communication between departments that did not always lead to concrete action. There were also periods where a lack of communication meant Mrs X was unaware of how and when matters would progress. Despite making chases, she felt she needed to make further chases of the Council to get things done. In the circumstances of this complaint, I am satisfied this lack of decisive and timely action is fault. It would have caused her further significant and avoidable distress, frustration and uncertainty. I have made a recommendation below to remedy the injustice caused.

Complaint handling

54. Mrs X first complained to the Council on 18 April. According to the Council’s policy, her stage one response should have been issued by 2 May which was 10 working days later. According to its policy, it should also have updated her about any delay.
55. Evidence shows the Council did not acknowledge the complaint until 2 May, saying she had complained on 22 April. It then said the response would be due by 7 May.
56. When she did not receive this, Mrs X chased the Council. It was only then that the Council responded to say it needed more time and would respond by 20 May, which it did.
57. Overall, Mrs X waited 21 working days for the response. In response to my enquiries, the Council acknowledged the delay and said it was due to an oversight in the relevant team. I am satisfied this delay and the lack of communication until chased about it are fault. It would have caused Mrs X avoidable distress and frustration. I have made a recommendation below to remedy this injustice.
58. The Council’s stage two response incorrectly stated July’s treatment at Property A had been carried out. However, this did not happen due to unauthorised occupancy at the time. The response also failed to realise two treatments had been scheduled for Property A, rather than the one it incorrectly said had happened. I am satisfied this lack of clarity is fault. It would have caused Mrs X further avoidable distress and frustration. It also meant that Mrs X had to continue to push the Council to move matters forward as the stage two response indicated matters had been resolved. I have made a recommendation below to remedy this injustice.

Back to top

Agreed action

59. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within four weeks of the date of my final decision:
• apologise to Mrs X for the identified injustice;
• make a symbolic payment to Mrs X of £600 to reflect the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by the identified injustice; and
• share the Ombudsman’s guidance on the principles of good administrative practice with relevant officers and managers.
60. The apology written should be in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies on making an effective apology.
61. Payments made are in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies.
62. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

63. I have now completed my investigation. I uphold this complaint with a finding of fault causing an injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman