Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to accept responsibility for damage to his property caused by tenants recommended under an incentive scheme for private landlords. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains that the Council refuses to reimburse him for damage caused to a property which he let to tenants recommended to him under a private renting incentive scheme. He says he was forced to evict the tenants and that they caused damage to his property which cost him over £10,000

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
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response and Mr X has commented on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X says the Council should reimburse him over £10,000 for damage caused to his property by tenants recommended to him under a landlord’s incentive scheme. The Council says the only legal agreement it has with landlords in the scheme concerns the payment of an incentive and the landlords’ agreement to the terms related to the condition of the property they rent.
5. The Council provided a copy of the scheme terms which specifically excludes any responsibility for the conduct of the tenants. Mr X had an assured tenancy agreement with the tenants, and he used the landlord’s powers under this agreement to seek possession in the courts. The incentive agreement was a private contract between the Council and Mr X and he could seek a remedy in court if he believes the Council has breached the terms. However, he has provided no evidence of this in his complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

6. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman