Summary: Mr X complains the Council has failed to address issues of disrepair and safety at the HMO where he lives, and has failed to respond to his complaints. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr X’s reports of disrepair at his property.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X complains the Council has failed to address issues of disrepair and safety at the HMO where he lives and has failed to respond to his complaints.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), 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. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Mr X;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• discussed the issues with Mr X;
• sent a statement setting out my draft decision to Mr X and the Council and invited their comments. I have considered Mr X’s comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X lives in a two-story property that has been converted to a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO). A HMO is a property rented out by at least three people who are not from one household but share facilities like the bathroom and kitchen.
6. Private tenants may complain to their council about a failure by the landlord to keep the property in good repair. Councils have powers under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) to take enforcement action against private landlords where the council has identified a hazard which puts the health and safety of the tenant at risk.
7. In February 2017 Mr X complained to the Council about disrepair at the property. An Environmental Health Technical Officer (Officer 1) visited Mr X’s property and noted there were no HHSRS Category 1 or Category 2 hazards. There were however contraventions of the Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation Regulations. These Regulations impose duties on the person managing a HMO in relation to the repair, maintenance, cleanliness and good order of the house and the facilities and equipment in it.
8. Officer 1 wrote to the managing agents for the property with a scheduled of works that needed to be carried out. The schedule of works included work to
• ensure the fire alarm was in working order;
• secure a loose handrail;
• ensure the drainage in the shower was free flowing and in full working order;
• repair a defective window lock;
• re-attach a defective heater;
• repair or adjust an external door to prevent water ingress;
• prevent further water leaking into the kitchen.
9. Officer 1 confirmed they would reinspect the property in six weeks to check the contraventions were resolved. During the next inspection, Officer 1 would also make a full assessment of the fire protection issues.
10. When Officer 1 returned he found that work was ongoing, but had not been completed. Officer 1 visited again in July 2017 and wrote to the managing agents expressing disappointment that most of the works identified in March 2017 were still outstanding. They provided a further schedule of works detailing the outstanding works and further contraventions. Officer 1 also served a Notice declaring the property to be a HMO.
11. Officer 1 visited the property again in October 2017. At this time, the fire alarm was not functioning properly, the brackets to the staircase handrail remained loose and the shower in one of the rooms remained blocked. The Council received new fire alarm certificates and confirmation the works were completed in November 2017.
12. Mr X did not consider the issues of disrepair at the property had been resolved. He contacted Organisation Y for assistance in pursuing the matter. Organisation Y contacted the Council in March 2018. It asked whether it had taken enforcement action in relation to the issues identified in October 2017. As it did not receive a response, Organisation Y made a formal complaint on Mr X’s behalf in June 2018. It asserted the Council had failed to satisfy itself the HMO was free of Category 1 and Category 2 hazards.
13. The Council did not acknowledge Organisation 1’s complaint, but an Officer, Officer 2 made an informal inspection. They then served a notice on the managing agents informing them of a formal inspection. Officer 2 inspected the property with the managing agents on 27 July 2018. The Council states there were some issues, but no Category 1 or Category 2 hazards. Officer 2 wrote to the managing agents setting out work that should be carried out. This included:
• providing PAT testing certificates for all appliances;
• inspection certificates for all fixed electrical installations;
• a step by step guide on how to reset the alarm after false alarms;
• replacing missing tiles and making to roof water tight; and
• carrying out work to ensure a free flow of waste water from the shower units.
14. As the Council had not responded to Organisation Y’s complaint, Mr X contacted his MP. The MP raised his concerns with the Council and Officer 1 responded to Mr X’s complaint on 17 August 2018.
15. Officer 1 apologised for the delay and confirmed they could find no trace of Organisation Y’s letter of March 2018. They confirmed the issues relating to the fire alarm and lose handrail had been resolved, and that it was investigating the intermittent drainage issues. Officer 1 also confirmed the property had no Category 1 hazards and other matters were being addressed.
16. Organisation Y did not receive Officer 1’s letter. In late August 2018 Mr X contacted his local councillor as he had received a notice to quit and had to leave the property by 23 October 2018. Mr X believes his landlord issued this notice because he was complaining about disrepair at the property. The councillor contacted the Council to ask what assistance it could provide to Mr X.
17. According to the Council’s records, a housing solutions officer contacted Mr X to discuss his situation and options.
18. In September 2018 the managing agents confirmed:
• the gas providers had confirmed the gas supply to the property had been disconnected;
• a ‘How to Operate’ sign for the fire alarm system had been put up; and
• it had completed the PAT testing.
19. The agents subsequently confirmed in November 2018 that the remaining works to Mr X’s property had been completed.
20. Organisation Y is concerned that there are outstanding repair issues and the Council has not responded to its correspondence. It has asked the Ombudsman to investigate the matter.
21. In response to my enquiries the Council states that most of issues identified in July 2018 were general repairs and did not fall within the Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation Regulations. The Council will assist tenants by asking landlords to carry out repairs, but has no power to enforce this request if the landlord refuses.
22. Management of Mr X’s property has now passed to Organisation Z. As Organisation Z is a registered social landlord, the Council cannot regulate it using the Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation Regulations or its Licence Conditions. However the Council does still have a power to deal with hazards under the HHSRS. The Council states there are no HHSRS Category 1 or Category 2 hazards at the property.
23. An officer visited Mr X’s property as part of its licensing checks on two-storey HMOs on 2 November 2018. The Council states there were no issues of disrepair apparent and the tenants who were present did not report any. Mr X subsequently contacted the officer to complain that the property was excessively cold. The Council states the property was not cold at the time of the visit and no other residents complained.
24. The Council states Mr X complained to Officer 2 about harassment from the landlord/ agent. Mr X showed Officer 2 a video of a confrontation he had had with someone representing the landlord/ agent. He also said the landlord/ agent had knocked on his door without notice several times, but could not confirm when. Officer 2 did not consider the video constituted harassment. They also advised Mr X that without details of when the landlord/agent had visited without notice, they were unable to take the matter further. Officer 2 advised Mr X to keep diary sheets so that they could review the matter once there was solid evidence.
25. In relation to the notice to quit, the Council states Officer 2 tried to contact Organisation Y with details of a technical defence to the eviction proceedings. As they were unable to, Officer 2 spoke to an advisor from another organisation, who was supporting Mr X in the possession proceedings.
26. Mr X has responded to the draft decision. He maintains there are repair issues that have still not been attended to. As these issues were raised before the management of the property passed to a registered social landlord, Mr X believes the Council should be able to deal with them.
27. As suggested by Officer 2, Mr X has kept a diary of the occasions when the landlord’s agent or contractors have visited without notice. Most of the entries relate to the period before Mr X met with Officer 2 in July 2018. Since this meeting, workmen have twice attended unannounced to carry out the outstanding works. There is no record of any unannounced visits since management of the property passed to Organisation Z. It is unclear whether Mr X has also shared these notes with the Council.

Analysis

28. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council has dealt with Mr X’s reports of disrepair. The documentation provided shows officers visited the property to assess the issues and contacted the managing agents with details of the necessary repairs. The issues identified were not HHSRS Category 1 or Category 2 hazards. The Council could not therefore serve a Hazard Awareness or Improvement notice. Some issues contravened the Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation Regulations, and have been resolved. The Council has also assisted in resolving other issues of general repair.
29. If there are any issues of general disrepair the Council would be unable to purse this with Company Z under the Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation Regulations or its Licence Conditions. This would be the case whether the issues were new or had been raised with previous management agents.
30. Although the Council routinely contacted the managing agents in relation to the required works, there is no evidence it told Mr X of its actions or kept him updated. There was also a delay in responding to Organisations Y’s complaint. The Council has apologised for this delay. It is unclear why Organisation Y did not receive Officer 1’s letter of 17 August 2018, but there is no evidence this was due to fault on the part of the Council. It is correctly addressed and marked for the attention of Mr X’s representative.

Back to top

Final decision

31. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr X’s reports of disrepair at his property.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman