Summary: Mr X complains about the enforcement action taken against him by the Council in connection with premises he owns and rents out. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because the availability of appeal rights to a property tribunal places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, says the Council has acted with bias, and due to the personal grudge and racism of an officer, in taking enforcement action against him in connection with premises he owns and rents out. He says as a result of the Council’s fault he has been fined £6,000 and has been placed on the rogue landlord register.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), 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. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Mr X and the Council. I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr X is the owner of a property which he rents out. The Council took enforcement action against him due to the condition of the property by serving Notices under the Housing Act 1980.
7. The Council served a preliminary improvement notice on Mr X in 2016. Following an inspection in 2017 which revealed Mr X had not adhered to the undertaking he had made to carry out the necessary works, and because he had not rectified the hazards noted in the preliminary improvement notice, the Council served a Statutory Improvement Notice.
8. When a subsequent compliance inspection in relation to the required works showed that not all the works had been completed, the Council invited Mr X to attend an interview at Council offices.
9. Mr X did not attend the meeting and in February 2018 the Council served a Financial Penalty Notice which required Mr X to pay £6,000. The Notice advised Mr X of his right of appeal against the Notice to the First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).
10. Mr X complained to the Council about its actions in what he saw as its illegal attempts to take his property from him and about the behaviour of the officer who had been dealing with his case who he accused of bias, racism and holding a personal grudge. The Council did not uphold his complaint and found no evidence to support Mr X’s allegations against the officer.

Assessment

11. The restrictions highlighted at paragraphs 3 and 4 apply to Mr X’s complaint. He had a right of appeal against the Financial Penalty Notice to the Property Tribunal and the availability of this alternative remedy, which we would reasonably have expected him to have made use of, places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.
12. Earlier events also fall outside our jurisdiction because they happened too far in the past to be investigated now and I see no grounds which warrant exercising discretion.

Back to top

Final decision

13. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the availability of appeal rights to a property tribunal places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman