Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of allegations made by the tenant of a house owned by his parents. The Ombudsman found there was fault causing injustice when the Council gave confusing advice about rights of access and the allegations made by the tenant. The Ombudsman did not find evidence of bias.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council was biased in its handling of allegations made by the tenant of a house owned by his parents. He said the Council threatened to prosecute him for harassment if he tried to enter the house and this prevented access for about a year. As a result, Mr X could not carry out repairs to the property and his parents lost out on rent when the tenant did not pay.
2. Mr X also said the Council ignored evidence the tenant committed benefit and legal aid fraud while not paying rent.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have investigated the way the Council responded to allegations it received from the tenant of Mr X’s parent’s house.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. 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

6. As part of the investigation I have considered the following:
• The complaint and the documents provided by the complainant.
• Documents provided by the Council and its comments in response to my enquiries.
• Protection from Eviction Act 1977.
• The Housing Act 2004.
• The Housing Health and Safety Rating System.
• The Council’s Advice for Tenants at Risk of Eviction Policy.
• The Council’s Tenancy Relations and Guidance Procedure.
• The Council’s Anti-Social Behaviour Policy and Procedures.
7. Mr X and the Council both had an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision and I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. It is a criminal offence for a landlord to evict a tenant without following the correct legal steps. Illegal eviction can include:
• Forcing a tenant to leave by threatening or harassing them;
• Physically removing them;
• Stopping a tenant getting into parts of their home; and/or
• Changing the locks.
9. Private tenants can complain to the council if their landlord is harassing them or trying to evict them. Councils should offer tenants advice about their housing rights and options. Councils have powers to investigate and prosecute a landlord where they commit an offence.
10. If a private tenant continues to occupy premises after their tenancy has come to an end, the landlord must obtain a court order to recover possession of the premises.
11. Private landlords have a responsibility to make sure rented accommodation is maintained to a certain standard. This includes carrying out repairs.
12. Private tenants can complain to the council if the landlord fails to keep the property in good repair. Councils can take enforcement action against private landlords if they identify a hazard placing the health and safety of the tenant at risk.
13. Councils will try to deal with the problem informally first, but if this is unsuccessful, they have powers to require the landlord to make improvements or to issue the landlord with a fine.

What happened

14. I have summarised below some of the key events leading to Mrs X’s complaint. This is not intended to be a detailed account of what happened.
15. Mr X’s parents own a house which they rented to three tenants (Tenants A, B and C). Each tenant had their own bedroom and shared communal areas of the house.
16. Tenant A moved out in February 2018. Tenant B contacted Mr X in June 2018 to tell him they had decided to move out of the house at the end of July 2018. Mr X contacted Tenant C by email and asked her to move out of the house at the end of July as well because his parents had decided to let the house to a family instead.
17. Tenant C’s mother contacted the Council on 21 June 2018 to report Mr X was unlawfully trying to evict Tenant C. Mr X denies this. He says he asked Tenant C to move out but did not demand it.
18. Mr X issued Tenant C an eviction notice on 12 July 2018, giving two months’ notice to vacate the house.
19. Tenant C’s mother contacted the Council again on 21 July 2018 to report an illegal eviction. She said Mr X was threatening Tenant C. The Council said Tenant C should call the police if Mr X tried to forcefully evict her. Tenant C’s mother asked the Council to contact Mr X and to inspect the house because of a moth infestation.
20. Mr X arranged for a gas engineer to carry out safety checks on 19 July 2018. Mr X notified the tenants. Tenant B gave consent, but Tenant C did not respond. Mr X could not access the house because the door was jammed, and Tenant C did not respond to his phone calls. Tenant B also could not access the house. Mr X took advice from Landlord Action and called a locksmith. Tenant B agreed for Mr X to gain entry. The police then arrived at the house responding to a call from Tenant C who said the house was being burgled. The police said Mr X risked being arrested for breach of the peace and he should liaise with Tenant C’s mother in future as Tenant C has Asperger’s. Mr X was unaware of this.
21. Tenant C’s mother called the Council on 23 July 2018. She said Mr X let himself into the house on 19 July. Tenant C suffers with heart problems and wanted action taken against Mr X for harassment and threats.
22. Mr X telephoned the Council on 25 July 2018 and spoke to Officer A. They discussed Tenant C’s complaints and Mr X explained what happened on 19 July. Mr X was left with the impression Tenant C made allegations of sexual harassment against him, that he made threats to make Tenant C leave, that he forged Tenant B’s signature on a document giving him permission to access the house, and that he tried to make an illegal eviction.
23. The Council wrote to Mr X on 25 July 2018. It said Tenant C alleged he tried to unlawfully evict her. The Council told Mr X it had powers to prosecute landlords who unlawfully evict tenants and he needed to get a possession order.
24. Tenant C’s mother then told the Council Mr X issued Tenant C a letter about vacating the house. He harassed Tenant C and let himself into the communal areas of the house without notice with workmen, contractors, and estate agents. He bombarded Tenant C with emails and text messages, and she felt intimidated.
25. Mr X told the Council he planned to test the fire alarms at the house on 28 August 2018. He suspected Tenant C’s mother was also living the house and refusing him access. The Council told Mr to take legal advice.
26. The Council spoke to Tenant C’s mother on 31 August 2018. She had been staying at the house because Tenant C felt anxious. She also said Tenant C had been staying at her flat because she felt unsafe. They thought Mr X testing the fire alarms was harassment. The Council said Mr X had a right to do this. The Council also told Tenant C’s mother they were not allowed to change the locks or install bolts as it is a shared house. The Council said it would close the case, but Tenant C can get in touch again if Mr X acted unlawfully.
27. Mr X emailed Tenant C on 13 September. He asked her to confirm her intentions following the eviction notice he issued on 12 July. He also asked about the moth infestation she reported to the Council so he could take action.
28. Tenant C’s mother contacted the Council 21 September 2018 to report Mr X was harassing Tenant C while they were dealing with a bereavement. Tenant C’s mother said they had been advised by Shelter, the housing charity, to stay in the house.
29. Tenant C’s mother contacted the Council on 30 October 2018. She said Mr X planned to visit the other rooms in the house but had no reason to and this was causing stress.
30. Mr X emailed the Council on 9 November 2018. He said Tenant C had not paid rent and was conscious of attempts to contact them being construed as harassment. He planned to inspect the house and asked if the Council wanted to be present.
31. Mr X emailed the Council on 15 November 2018. He said he took legal advice and can carry out maintenance with 24 hours’ notice. He wanted an electrician to visit the house to check the fire alarms. This was work he planned earlier but Tenant C blocked access.
32. The Council discussed the visit with Tenant C’s mother. It then told Mr X Tenant C agreed to a contactor entering the house, but not Mr X. The Council said it would attend but Mr X could not. Mr X raised concerns about the Council supporting Tenant C in taking over the house, banning him from showing new tenants round the house, and refusing to pay rent.
33. An electrician carried out work on 22 November 2018. Afterwards the Council told Mr X Tenant C wanted to stay in the house. It asked Mr X to compromise and allow this. It suggested he employ a letting agency. Alternatively, the Council asked Mr X to return Tenant C’s deposit so she could find another house. Mr X thought if he returned the deposit Tenant C would say they had not received it. He asked the Council why it was supporting Tenant C against him. The Council said it had a duty to prevent homelessness.
34. Mr X emailed the Council on 17 December 2018 to tell it he intended to increase Tenant C’s rent from £310 to £1,000 a month from February 2019. He did not expect Tenant C to pay but planned to issue a claim in court for unpaid rent. Mr X asked the Council for its views and to not tell Tenant C.
35. The Council reviewed the case and Officer B spoke to Tenant C for details of the tenancy and how the house is occupied. Officer B established Mr X had rights to occupy the communal areas of the house.
36. Mr X said the Council supported Tenant C to deny access to communal areas and he was threatened with arrest for harassment and breach of the peace. He said Tenant C told the energy supplier the house was empty.
37. Officer B spoke to Mr X on 2 January 2019. They said it appeared the Council previously gave Mr X wrong advice about his rights to access the house as Tenant C only had the right to shared use of communal spaces.
38. Officer B spoke to Tenant C’s solicitor on 3 January 2019 to tell them about the Council’s change in position about Mr X’s right to access communal areas.
39. Mr X emailed the Council in March 2019. He said the Council knowingly supported and enabled Tenant C to live in his parents’ house rent free. The Council replied in April 2019. It said it did not tell Tenant C not to pay rent.
40. Mr X said the Council stopped him entering the house, threatened him with prosecution for harassment, gave conflicting advice, breached confidences by contacting Tenant C against his wishes, was biased by asking him to let Tenant C continue to live in the house or return the deposit so they could find a new property.
41. Mr X told the Council on 2 June 2019 he intended to show a possible new tenant round the house. He also told the Council about Tenant C’s mother’s racist social media posts against Muslims. He accused the Council of assisting Tenant C in a racist campaign against him.
42. Mr X told the Council about his solicitor’s conversation with Tenant C’s mother on 3 June 2019. Tenant C’s mother intended to block access to the house and implied threats of violence. Mr X thought there was a racial component to her behaviour. He also told the Council Tenant C changed the locks at the house and stopped a new tenant living there, leaving them homeless. The Council told Mr X to seek legal advice about accessing the house.
43. The Council’s anti-social behaviour (ASB) team reviewed the social media posts. The police treated the posts as a hate incident because the comments were Tenant C’s mother’s own opinion and not aimed at Mr X personally. The Council told Mr X it could not take action as it could not identify any ASB and the police had already investigated. It offered mediation, but Mr X did not think this was suitable.
44. Tenant C’s mother contacted the Council on 13 June 2019. She said the house had no heating or hot water, the boiler was faulty, and there was a leak in the roof. She said this was reported to Mr X, but he did not respond. She also said Mr X was constantly harassing Tennant C.
45. The Council spoke to Mr X. He was unaware of the issues as Tenant C had not contacted him. The Council said it had a duty to act when tenant’s report hazards in a house. Mr X agreed to send an engineer.
46. The Council told Tenant C’s mother an engineer would visit to assess the problems. Tenant C’s mother said no one was at the house and she only really wanted to talk about the eviction. The Council said she had reported disrepair, and someone must be at home to allow access to an engineer.
47. Mr X later emailed the Council to say an engineer visited the house, but Tenant C did not answer the door. Mr X booked another appointment. He asked the Council to tell Tenant C and to attend with the engineer.
48. The Council telephoned Tenant C’s mother to ask what happened and to tell her someone must be in when the engineer visited again.
49. On 17 June 2019 Mr X told the Council he had taken legal advice and was within his rights to access the house as it was an emergency. The Council agreed and said it would attend with Mr X. It would cease helping Tenant C about the disrepair if she did not allow access again.
50. Mr X and the Council attended the house on 19 June with an engineer, but there was nobody in the house to allow access. The Council telephoned Tenant C’s mother, but she refused to attend because she was ill. The Council said it would not assist any further.
51. The Council wrote to Tenant C on 26 June 2019. It said she had not cooperated with requests to allow a gas engineer to access the house and her complaint was closed.
52. Tenant C’s social worker contacted the housing department on 25 July 2019 asking for urgent repair works. The social worker said Tenant C was not given notice about the earlier visits. The housing department told Tenant C’s social worker about its efforts to get a gas engineer to visit the house, but Tenant C did not cooperate. The social worker asked the housing department to rearrange and oversee the work. Tenant C offered to allow access and wait in a nearby café. Mr X and the Council agreed to this.
53. The Council accessed the house along with Mr X and an engineer on 5 August 2019. It found significant mould and fungus growth in the toilet and store cupboard, caused by a leak, and rising damp on the landing. An engineer found no issues with the boiler. A plumber advised the leak must have been present for six to twelve months to cause such damage. The toilet was not blocked but had not been flushed for a significant amount of time.
54. Mr X accused the Council of assisting Tenant C to damage his parents’ house. He considered the damage to be ASB. He estimated it would cost £10,000 to fix.
55. The Council responded on 12 August 2019. It could not take action because the damage was not considered ASB. It suggested Mr X take legal advice.
56. Mr X emailed the Council on 5 December 2019, after Tenant C had left his parents’ house. He found racist graffiti written on a door in the house which he reported to the police. He said the Council ignored his earlier complaints about racism. He accused the Council of enabling racism by supporting Tenant C throughout.
57. Mr X emailed the Council again on 9 January 2020. He said the police were taking no further action.

Mr X’s complaints

58. Mr X complained to the Council on 21 May 2019 about the way it treated his family. He said it:
• Broke its rules about contacting landlords.
• Deliberately hid serious allegations the tenant made about him.
• Assisted a rogue tenant who lied, despite his evidence.
• Was biased towards the tenant and contacted them despite him asking for confidential advice.
• Misinformed him about legal rights to enter the house.
59. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint on 6 June 2019. It said its housing solutions team was not involved so it had not breached the policy Mr X referred to in his complaint. The Council admitted it should have asked the tenant for their agreement to contact Mr X about their complaint. It acknowledged it delayed contacting him.
60. The Council denied hiding serious allegations about Mr X made by the tenant. It was concerned at how Officer A spoke to Mr X about Tenant C’s complaints and understood why Mr X was concerned there were more allegations and information, but it had disclosed all relevant information to him. After sending Mr X an initial warning letter about illegal eviction and harassment, the Council took no further enforcement action against him.
61. The Council said it made enquiries with the tenant about the nature of the tenancy, but it was not biased toward them.
62. The Council told Mr X not to attend the house in November 2018 due to the tenant’s concerns. It helped to facilitate an engineer to visit. This was the best way to reach an agreement without escalating the issues and Mr X agreed to this. It advised Mr X to take legal advice.
63. The Council said it tried to assist a complex enquiry in an area it does not normally provide advice to landlords. It apologised if this came across as hostile. It denied continuing to protect the tenant and said officers tried to provide best possible service. It accepted responses could have been quicker.
64. The Council does not condone or support the racist behaviour Mr X highlighted and its ASB team looked into this. It is not responsible for damage to Mr X’s property.
65. Mr X asked the Council to consider his complaint at stage two on 3 July 2019. As well as the issues already complained about, he said:
• The Council knowingly enabled a racist attack and ignored the racist component to the case.
• The Council ignored threats made by the tenant’s mother.
• The tenant is fraudulently trying to avoid paying council tax and altered a signature on a document.
66. The Council sent its final complaint response to Mr X on 17 July 2019. It set out the roles of its housing compliance and enforcement teams and said it did not break its rules.
67. The Council confirmed no sexual allegations were made about Mr X by the tenant. It also confirmed it took no further action against Mr X after the initial warning letter about illegal eviction and harassment. However, the Council was very concerned by Officer A’s conversation with Mr X. It considered Officer A was trying to tell Mr X to be cautious with Tenant C because they could make allegations about him, not that they had. Officer A was sympathetic to Mr X and expressed doubt about Tenant C’s motives. The Council said this was inappropriate and unprofessional.
68. The Council acknowledged Officer B contacted the tenant after Mr X asked for his enquiry to be treated confidentially, but it said Officer B only asked questions about the tenancy agreement and did not breach a confidence. It did not accept there were undue delays responding to Mr X’s query about increased rent, because of the Christmas period and officers on leave.
69. The Council apologised for the confusion caused around Mr X’s rights of access. It said officers believed the tenant would not have allowed access to the electrician if Mr X had attended, or even stood in the drive. Therefore, it asked him not to attend. It said it tried to assist by overseeing the visits but in hindsight it would not have interfered and would have instead told Mr X to seek legal advice about gaining entry. It also said that on several occasions it told Mr X to seek legal advice.
70. The Council said its ASB team responded to Mr X’s reports about racism and he was correct to inform the police. It strongly denied enabling racism but said behaviour like this does not take away the Council’s statutory duty to respond to reports of illegal eviction and landlord harassment. It confirmed the tenant made an enquiry about council tax and it passed Mr X’s evidence about forgery on to the council tax team.
71. Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman on 8 October 2019. He said the Council was biased, threatened to prosecute him for harassment, denied him access to the house, refused to consider his evidence about the tenant, and refused to consider racism by the tenant. He wanted the Council to apologise, contribute to the cost of repairs to the house and lost rent, release details of all allegations made by the tenant, and investigate the tenant for fraud.

Response to enquiries

72. The Council told me it has a responsibility to remain objective and fulfil its statutory responsibilities to investigate complaints about landlord harassment and illegal evictions, and to ensure disrepair is addressed.
73. The Council accepts its advice to Mr X to only access the house when necessary may have caused confusion up until 2 January 2019. By trying to help Mr X carry out later visits the Council said it demonstrated it took a pragmatic approach to ensure repairs could be carried out.
74. It refutes denying Mr X access to the house for a year, preventing repairs being carried out, or being responsible for Tenant C failing to pay rent. It said Mr X was under the mistaken belief Tenant C’s behaviour changed the Council’s responsibility to ensure Tenant C was protected from illegal eviction. It said legislation does not allow for officer interpretation of a tenant’s motives.
75. It did not investigate the racist graffiti because Mr X’s correspondence made it clear he did not want it to.
76. Tenant C left significant council tax debt, which the Council is trying to pursue. The only action the Council could take over Mr X’s allegation Tenant C forged his father’s signature is tell the police.

Back to top

Analysis

77. I have not seen evidence of bias by the Council. I appreciate Mr X felt the Council ignored his evidence about the behaviour of Tenant C and took their side. However, the Council owed a statutory duty to Tenant C when they reported disrepair, harassment, and unlawful eviction. The Council cannot ignore complaints from tenants about the conduct of landlords even in circumstances where it appears a tenant is acting unreasonably, maliciously, or for their own gain. The Council was correct in sending a letter to Mr X about its powers to deal with such complaints.
78. I have not seen evidence Tenant C made sexual allegations against Mr X. I appreciate this was the impression Mr X had after his conversation with Officer A, but this is not the case. The Council said Officer A’s call was unprofessional. I agree. Officer A made wholly inappropriate observations about Tenant C’s mental state and character, and implied they could make serious allegations about Mr X. That was fault. Officer A has left the Council so it could not address this with him.
79. The result of Mr X’s conversation with Officer A was that he believed Tenant C made a serious sexual allegation about him. When the Council could not provide details of the allegation, Mr X thought the Council was hiding this, was on Tenant C’s side, and was not open with him. This caused Mr X uncertainty and avoidable distress.
80. The Council apologised for giving Mr X confusing advice about his right to access the house. Officer B reviewed the case in January 2019 and established Mr X could access communal areas. The Council accepts it may have been better to inform Tenant C about this and tell Mr X to use his legal rights to enter the house.
81. The confusion of the Council’s advice caused Mr X further undue distress and enhanced his feeling the Council was supporting Tenant C against him.
82. The Council should have made enquiries about Mr X’s rights of access when Tenant C first reported Mr X entered the house against their wishes in July 2018. This may have prevented some of Mr X’s feelings about Council bias.
83. I appreciate the Council does not consider it breached Mr X’s confidence when Officer B contacted Tenant C’s mother. Officer B did not discuss increased rent with Tenant C. However, given the dispute, and Mr X’s express wish for the tenant not to be informed, the Council could have handled the situation better by first speaking to Mr X about the tenancy arrangements and then getting his permission to contact Tenant C’s mother.
84. Tenant C’s failure to pay rent, and any damage they caused to the house, is not the fault of the Council. I have not seen evidence the Council prevented Mr X from accessing the house. This was caused by Tenant C and her mother. Mr X could have exercised his legal rights to enter the house through the courts. The Council tried to help allow access to the house for maintenance, though it recognises this may have caused further confusion. After its first letter detailing its powers, I have not seen evidence the Council made other threats to prosecute Mr X for harassment.
85. The Council’s ASB team looked into Tenant C’s mother’s alleged racist social media posts following Mr X’s complaint. It noted the police treated the material as a hate incident and decided it could not take any further action. This was not the result Mr X wanted, but the Council followed its policy. I have not seen evidence of fault in how it considered the complaint.
86. I have seen Mr X’s evidence of the racist graffiti left by Tenant C. This is deplorable and I can appreciate why Mr X thought there was racial motivation behind Tenant C’s behaviour and allegations. However, this is not the fault of the Council. The Council only learned about the racist graffiti when Tenant C moved out of the house. It did not investigate because the police were looking into it. I do not consider there is evidence the Council enabled Tenant C’s racist behaviour towards Mr X and his family. Ultimately the Council still owed a duty to give housing advice to Tenant C, despite their behaviour.

Agreed action

87. Within eight weeks of my final decision, the Council agreed to apologise and pay Mr X £300 to remedy the confusion and distress its faults caused.

Back to top

Final decision

88. I have completed my investigation. There was fault causing injustice when the Council gave confusing advice about rights of access and the allegations made by the tenant. I did not find evidence of bias.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

89. I have not investigated whether Mr X’s parent’s tenant falsely claimed benefits and legal aid. The Council is entitled to take what action it considers suitable. This is not a personal injustice to Mr X or his family.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman