Summary: Miss X complains the Council is pursuing her for a debt from 2013 which she does not agree she owes. We will not investigate this complaint. Miss X was aware in 2013 the Council intended to carry out works at her tenant’s address and charge
Miss X. She could have complained earlier about this and its actions in relation to the tenant not paying rent, and therefore this complaint is late. In any event, we would be unlikely to find the Council at fault.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council:
• did not properly intervene in 2013 when her tenant did not pay their rent to Miss X, leading to significant rent arrears;
• replaced a boiler at the property in 2013 and charged Miss X for it; and
• has more recently begun formal recovery action for the debt relating to the boiler.
2. Miss X says these issues have caused her significant stress, time and trouble and she has lost out financially. Enforcement agents’ visits have been embarrassing.

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’. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information Miss X provided when she complained to us.
6. I considered the complaints she sent to the Council and the responses it sent.
7. Miss X commented on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. Miss X is a landlord. She rented out her property to a tenant who received housing benefit, but in 2013 the tenant did not pay their rent. Miss X says she was in contact with the Council at that time, but it did not help by paying the housing benefit directly to her. Miss X could have complained to the Ombudsman at that time. There is no good reason she did not complain earlier, and so we should not use our discretion to investigate this part of her complaint.
9. The Council became involved in relation to the boiler at the property in 2013.
   Miss X says the boiler in place was brand new and was under warranty. She says the tenant did not allow her access to the property to check the boiler and arrange any necessary works. However, the Council says Miss X did not allow it access. The Council made Miss X aware in 2013 it intended to replace the boiler and charge her for it. Councils have powers under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (introduced by the Housing Act 2004, Part 1) to take enforcement action against private landlords where they identify a hazard which puts the health and safety of a tenant at risk.
10. This part of the complaint is also late. Miss X knew in 2013 that the Council intended to replace the boiler and that it believed it posed a health and safety risk to her tenant. In my view, the obligation was on her as a landlord to make herself aware of what was happening: either the Council was going to take action, or she would have to. Too much time has elapsed for us to be able to investigate satisfactorily whether the Council had properly assessed that the boiler presented a risk or whether Miss X was right.
11. Miss X told us she received no further contact from the Council until 2019, when it began more formal recovery action for approximately £2500 which was the cost of the boiler it replaced. Miss X had been living out of the Council’s area for some years. It says it issued various warning letters in the period between 2013 and 2019 to the address it had for her, although Miss X disputes this. It involved an enforcement agency in 2019. I think it unlikely that we would find fault in the way the Council set about recovering the debt.
12. Miss X believes the Council is wrong to now be taking recovery action for the debt, and to have involved an enforcement agency. The Council is entitled to take recovery action in relation to debts that are properly owed, and the more recent recovery action relates to the earlier debt which is itself out of time, so I propose we also should not investigate the more recent recovery action. There is nothing that suggests to me we will find the Council at fault for that.

Back to top

Final decision

13. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because Miss X knew the Council’s intentions to charge her for the boiler replacement in 2013, so she could have complained about that and its involvement with rent arrears sooner. In any event, we would be unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions, including in relation to its more recent recovery action.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman