Summary: Ms B complains about the Council’s handling of matters relating to a housing Improvement Notice issued to her. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms B, complains about the Council’s handling of matters relating to a housing Improvement Notice she received and about the behaviour of the officer dealing with her case. She says the officer was biased and rude to her and that he did not explain the procedures properly to her. To resolve her complaint, she seeks a letter of apology from the officer and the Council.

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
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, 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, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Ms B, including the Council’s response to her complaint. I gave Ms B the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms B owns a private property which she rented out to tenants. The Council received a complaint about housing disrepair at the property and the case was allocated to Council Officer Mr X.
6. Mr X carried out an inspection of the property which resulted in an Improvement Notice being issued which required identified works to be carried out. Ms B contacted the Council to explain the Notice had been incorrectly addressed. This this led to the withdrawal of the Notice and Mr X carried out a second inspection. He was accompanied by a second officer who the Council says was shadowing Mr X as part of her training. While some of the defects identified by the earlier inspection had been addressed, remaining hazards led the Council to issue an amended Improvement Notice to Ms B.
7. There is a dispute between Ms B and the officers as to how the inspection was carried out and what was said between the parties. Ms B says Mr X was curt and that she felt bullied and ignored and that procedures were not followed. In responding to Ms B’s complaint about these matters the Council says its records do not reflect this. In response to Ms B’s claim that Mr X had also been biased and rude when she had rung the Council initially, it apologised that she felt she had not received a good customer experience but explained without corroborating evidence it could not form a view on this matter.

Assessment

8. The parties involved clearly have different accounts of what took place between them and, while I note Ms B remains dissatisfied with the Council’s response to her complaint, an investigation by the Ombudsman would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
9. Ms B had appeal rights to the First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) if she had wanted to challenge the Notice. So the restriction highlighted at paragraph 3 applies to any dispute she had about the Council’s actions in issuing the Notice and as such places matters involving the Notice outside our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman