Summary: The Council investigated Mr X’s complaints of disrepair at the property he rented and there is no evidence of fault in how it reached its decision not to take formal action against the landlord. However, the Council is at fault as it did not pursue some of Mr X’s complaints with the landlord and it delayed in responding to Mr X’s complaint but these faults did not cause significant injustice to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council has failed to properly investigate his complaints of disrepair and harassment by his landlord and failed to take sufficient action against his landlord. Mr X also complains the Council delayed in dealing with his complaint.

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 or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. If we are satisfied with a council’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

How I considered this complaint

4. I have:
• Considered the complaint and the information provided by Mr X including two videos;
• Discussed the issues with Mr X;
• Made enquiries of the Council and considered the information provided;
• Interviewed officer A, a council officer to obtain more information;
• Invited Mr X and the Council to comment on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Private landlords must obtain a licence to rent out a large house in multiple occupation (HMO) in accordance with the Housing Act 2004. A council can prosecute a landlord if they fail to meet the conditions of the licence without reasonable excuse. The Council may also revoke a licence if the breach is serious or persistent.
6. The Council’s website contains information about how it will deal with complaints about problems with private rented housing, including HMOs. It states the Council will first seek to resolve the problems in discussion with the landlord. If the landlord fails to comply the Council can seek legal notices to require the necessary work to improve or make safe the property.

What happened

7. Mr X lives in a house of multiple occupation (HMO). In January 2017 Mr X complained to the Council about disrepair in the property. The Council’s records show officer A, private sector housing officer, visited the property and met with Mr X. Officer A’s records of the visit note a number of deficiencies including that the kitchen for Mr X’s room was not usable following a recent refurbishment, the heater in Mr X’s room was not usable, a broken window in his room had been inadequately repaired. There was also insufficient hot water to the first floor bathroom.
8. Following the visit officer A contacted the landlord by telephone and asked her to take action to rectify the issues.
9. Officer A carried out a further visit at the end of January 2017. He again noted a number of issues including no working heater in Mr X’s room, inadequate insulation to some of the wiring to the cooker and issues with the water pressure in the bathroom. He also requested that the lock on the kitchen door be removed. Officer A noted that work to replace Mr X’s heater was underway at the time of his visit. The Council has also provided a copy of a photograph taken by officer A of the wiring during his visit.
10. In April 2017 officer A wrote to Mr X following his request for an update. Officer A advised that he had identified repairs required on his visit at the end of January and the landlord was taking action to address these matters. Officer A said the there was sufficient hot water to the first floor bathroom and the refurbishment of the kitchen was nearly complete. He also said that the landlord had alleged some remedial works to Mr X’s room may have been delayed due to access to Mr X’s room and he recommended Mr X co-operate with the landlord. Officer A said he would carry out a further visit.
11. At the end of April 2017 officer A visited the property. He noted areas of disrepair His record of the visit notes that the window in Mr X’s room had not been fixed. He also noted the landlord said Mr X had denied her access to carry out the repair. Mr X disputes that he prevented the landlord from accessing his room for repairs. Mr X has said the kitchen was not in a usable condition following the refurbishment as the cooker and fridge did not work. He has also said the electrics were not safe. So in May 2017 he paid an electrician to resolve the problems.
12. Mr X contacted the Council in August 2017 to report staff at the property had threatened him and that the landlord intended to evict him. The Council’s records note an officer explained the landlord would have to follow the proper process to evict him.
13. In November 2017 Mr X contacted the Council to complain his landlord had locked him out of the kitchen and about a lack of hot water. Officer B, private sector housing officer, visited the property. Officer B’s records note all but one of the hot taps were working and she inspected the kitchens. She raised a number of issues with the landlord’s representative including that the kitchens and bathrooms need to be cleaned. Officer B’s notes also record there was no evidence Mr X could not access a kitchen.
14. Officer B visited the property in January 2018 as the ceiling had collapsed in Mr X’s room. Mr X has said officer B was aware his new room suffered from mould and said she would deal with this. The Council has said officer B did not inspect Mr X’s new room but did note minor faults with the window and door which she reported to the manager. The Council has said officer B also advised Mr X to report any issues with his new room to the landlord in the first instance.
15. Mr X contacted his local councillor as he was concerned the landlord had not provided him with a new tenancy agreement. Officer B advised that Mr X needed to arrange with the landlord and a witness to counter sign his tenancy agreement to show he had moved rooms. She had contacted the manager of the property to ask them to arrange this and the landlord had advised Mr X had not responded to requests to meet to counter sign the tenancy agreement. Officer B advised this was a private matter between Mr X and the landlord.
16. A new landlord bought the property in early 2018. In May 2018 Mr X complained to the Council about disrepair in the property. The Council’s records show officer C, private sector housing officer, tried to contact Mr X but was unable to do so. Its records show she visited the property in May 2018. She noted refurbishment works were underway.
17. Officer C visited the property in June 2018 and met with Mr X. Her records note Mr X raised concerns about the bathrooms and kitchen being dirty and the broken window in a bathroom. He also raised concerns about a tenant living in his previous room with the collapsed ceiling who he said was harassing him. The Council’s records show officer C contacted the landlord who said he would be replacing the window in the bathroom as part of their refurbishment. Officer C’s records notes Mr X had moved to another room at this time.
18. Officer C visited the property again in August 2018. Her record of the visit notes she spoke to Mr X and viewed his room which she considered to be in good condition. She noted Mr X told her that the bathroom window had been repaired but he was concerned there was insufficient hot water in his room. Officer C noted the refurbishment of the property was progressing well and she had no concerns so she would take no further action.

Complaint

19. In late November 2017 Mr X made a complaint to the Council that officer A had not taken sufficient action to deal with disrepair at the property and had missed appointments. The Council considered Mr X’s complaint through its three stage complaints procedure. The Council’s complaints procedure provides it should respond at stage one within 10 working days but if this is not possible it will let the person complaining know when it can respond. The Council advised Mr X it could not respond within this timescale due to the Christmas period and it would respond by 12 January 2018. The Council missed this deadline and responded on 23 January 2018.
20. The Council did not uphold Mr X’s complaint. It said officers had carried out a number of inspections but there may have been a misunderstanding as Mr X thought officers would be meeting with him rather than just attending the property to carry out an inspection. The Council said it would continue to monitor the property.
21. On 5 February 2018 Mr X requested his complaint be escalated to stage two of the complaints procedure. In his complaint Mr X said there was no hot water for a period in January 2018, the broken window had not been repaired and there was a tenant in his old room despite the disrepair. Mr X also raised people had trespassed into his room and damaged his property.
22. The Council’s complaints procedure provides it should respond within 10 working days. The Council did not meet this deadline. It drafted a response to Mr X on 23 February 2018 but did not send it to Mr X. The Council sent the letter on 7 March 2018. Mr X later collected a copy on 12 March 2018.
23. In its response to Mr X’s complaint the Council said the temporary repair of the window in Mr X’s previous room was insufficient for prosecution and that Mr X had the use of other facilities in the property at the times when it noted lack of hot water to individual taps. The Council said it could not comment on Mr X’s allegations of trespass and damage to his property by his landlord and that there was no evidence of a tenant occupying Mr X’s previous room.
24. On 18 April 2018, Mr X requested his complaint be escalated to stage three of the complaints procedure. He raised complaints about lack of repairs and people trespassing in his room. He also raised that there was mould in his current room.
25. The Council’s complaints procedure provides it should respond within 35 working days. The Council responded on 7 June 2018 which was within the timescale. The Council advised officers had notified the new landlord of the previous issues but Mr X should provide the landlord with a comprehensive list of what matters were outstanding. The Council also advised it would need sufficient evidence of trespass into the property before it could take action.
26. Mr X considers the Council should have taken enforcement action against his landlords due to the disrepair. In response to my enquiries the Council has said its policy is to address reported contraventions informally in the first instance. It considered enforcement action was unnecessary as the landlord was taking action to address the disrepair identified by officers at their visits. It has also said it investigated Mr X’s complaints that the landlord had withdrawn hot water but found this was for a valid reason and it was reconnected within a reasonable timescale so does not amount to harassment. Furthermore, Mr X had access to other shared bathrooms and kitchens in the property.
27. The Council has acknowledged Mr X considered the hot water supply in his room to be insufficient. It considers it did not have grounds to take action as Mr X had access to adequate hot water supplies in the other facilities in the building.
28. The Council has provided a copy of the floor plans for the building. These show a shared shower room and two shared kitchens in the building. Mr X disputes he had access to other bathroom and kitchen facilities in the building. He has said he could not use a bathroom as it had been taken over by homeless people so he had to use the shower in another part of the building. Mr X has also said the manager prevented him from using the kitchen and bathroom in another part of the building. He has also said the shared kitchen in the other part of the building was dilapidated. When interviewed officer A said was satisfied there were sufficient other shared bathroom and kitchen facilities when inspecting the building as part of his inspection was to check basic facilities were available. Officer A did not recall the kitchen in the other part of the building was dilapidated and could not be used. Officer A’s inspections of the shared facilities is not recorded in the notes of his visits
29. The Council has also provided a copy of the licences held by both landlords. These show two shared kitchens on the first floor of each part of the building.

My assessment

30. My role is to examine how the Council investigated Mr X’s complaints of disrepair at the property and how it considered what action to take. I cannot investigate the actions of Mr X’s landlord or fellow tenants as they are not within our jurisdiction.
31. Mr X raised a number of complaints of disrepair between 2017 and 2018. The Council’s records show officers investigated Mr X’s complaints by visiting the property on a number of occasions. The Council has also provided some photographs show it visited the property. Mr X has questioned if the Council inspected the property as he considers the Council should have taken photographs at every inspection and of what it inspected. There is no requirement to do so. I am satisfied the Council’s records and the limited photographs provides show the Council inspected the property following Mr X’s complaints.
32. The Council’s inspections found issues of disrepair and poor management. The Council’s usual approach, which is common with other councils, is to address issues of disrepair and poor management by engaging with the landlords. The evidence shows the Council followed this approach as it raised the issues with the landlord who was taking action to address them. Furthermore, it would not be proportionate for the Council to take enforcement action when the landlord was addressing the issues.

Specific complaints of disrepair

33. Mr X has said the kitchen serving his room was not usable for some months and he had to pay an electrician so it could be brought back into use. He has also said the landlord harassed him by withdrawing hot water. Mr X has also complained the hot water supply in his room was not sufficient. The Council’s records show the kitchen was not usable as it was being refurbished. The records also note issues with the hot water in the bathroom. The Council did not take formal action as the landlord was addressing the issues and Mr X had access to other kitchen and bathroom facilities. Mr X disputes he had access to other facilities this so there is a conflict of evidence.
34. Officer A said he checked the shared facilities and was satisfied they were available but this is not recorded in the Council’s records. Mr X has also said there was another kitchen and a shower room but he was not allowed to use them and the kitchen and shower were dilapidated. The licences note another kitchen and the floor plan shows another shower room. There is no evidence to show Mr X told the Council he was unable to use the other kitchen or shower room. So, on balance, I consider there was another kitchen and other washing facilities available. Therefore, there is no fault in how the Council reached its decision not to take action against the landlord regarding these matters.
35. Mr X has said he reported to the Council that the cooker and fridge were not working and he had to pay for an electrician following the refurbishment. The Council’s records do not note Mr X reported the cooker and fridge were not working. But, on balance, the Council would not have taken enforcement action as it was satisfied Mr X had access to another kitchen.
36. However, the Council was aware in April 2017 that the landlord had not repaired the window in Mr X’s room. There is no evidence to show the Council followed this up informally with the landlord after April 2017. I am mindful the Council was pursuing other issues of disrepair and the relicensing of the property the time and the landlord had said Mr X refused access. It is also unlikely the Council would have been able to take formal action over the window. But there is no evidence to show the Council verified if Mr X was refusing access or continued to raise the broken window with the landlord to encourage the repair. This is fault. However, I cannot say this caused significant injustice to Mr X as I cannot know if the landlord would have satisfactorily repaired the window if the Council had raised the matter again.
37. Mr X has also said officer B undertook to deal with the mould in the room he moved to in January 2018 but failed to do so. The Council’s position is officer B did not inspect the room and told Mr X he would have to raise new issues with the landlord. I have no means of resolving this conflict of evidence as I cannot establish if officer B saw mould when Mr X moved rooms or what she told Mr X. There are no records of officer B’s visit. But, in any event, the Council would have had to give the landlord the opportunity of addressing the mould in the first instance.
38. Mr X did not report mould in the room to the Council until he made his stage three complaint in April 2018. Mr X has said he reported the mould in February and March 2018. But there is no evidence to show this. Officers inspected the property in May 2018 in response to Mr X’s continued complaints of disrepair and tried to arrange an appointment to view his room. So I am satisfied the Council took action to investigate the matter when Mr X reported it.
39. In commenting on my draft decision Mr X has raised other including a broken window lock, water leaking through the ceiling of the room he moved to in January 2018 and the landlord preventing him from washing his clothes in the kitchen and bathroom sinks. There is no evidence to show Mr X raised these issues with the Council at the time. But even if he had done, the Council would have given the landlord the opportunity to resolve the matters in the first instance and it is unlikely to have taken enforcement action.
40. The Council has also said it investigated Mr X’s complaints of trespass in his room but it found no evidence to show other people had unlawfully entered his room. There is no record of the Council’s investigation into this matter and this is fault. However, the Council would need sufficient evidence to show people are gaining access to Mr X’s room in his absence for it to be able to take action. Mr X has listed damage to his property but this is not evidence the damage was caused by a person accessing his room without permission. So, I cannot say the Council would have been able to raise the matter with the landlord or take any action.
41. There is no evidence to show the Council investigated Mr X’s complaint of June 2018 about a tenant living in his previous room harassing him. This is fault. But the Council would have had to raise this with the landlord in the first instance and the tenant moved in August 2018 so I do not consider this caused significant injustice to Mr X.

Record keeping

42. The Council’s records of its visits to the property are not adequate. Officer A’s records did not note other kitchen and bathroom facilities were available. The Council was relying on the availability of other facilities as one of the reasons for not taking formal action against the landlord so this should have been recorded. The Council should also have recorded its reasons for not taking formal action when the landlord did not repair the window to ensure it had an adequate audit trail of its consideration of the issues at the property. The Council should review its record keeping to ensure it has an adequate audit trail of its consideration.

Complaint

43. The Council did not meet the timescales set out in its complaints procedure when considering Mr X’s complaint at stages one and two of its complaints procedure. This is fault. But the time taken by the Council to respond was not excessive as to cause significant injustice to Mr X.

Back to top

Final decision

44. The Council investigated Mr X’s complaints of disrepair at the property he rented and there is no evidence of fault in how it reached its decision not to take formal action against the landlord. However, the Council is at fault as it did not pursue some of Mr X’s complaints with the landlord and it delayed in responding to Mr X’s complaint but these faults did not cause significant injustice to Mr X. I have therefore completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman