Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s response to his reports of disrepair in the home he rents from a private landlord. The Ombudsman found the Council was entitled to reach its decision and was not at fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s response to his reports of disrepair in the home he rents from a private landlord, which is affecting his health.
2. Mr X said the Council refused to carry out a second inspection of his home and often ignored his requests for help. He does not think the Council took strong enough action against his landlord and he wants the Council’s help to make the property liveable.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. 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.
• The Housing Health and Safety Rating System – Guidance for Landlords and Property Related Professionals (May 2006).
• The Housing Health and Safety Rating System Operating Guidance (February 2006).
• The Council’s Private Sector Housing Enforcement Policy (2019).
• The Protection from Eviction Act 1977.
• The Council’s Homelessness Prevention Strategy 2017.
6. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. Homes should not contain defects that could give rise to a hazard which puts an occupant’s health and safety at risk.
8. Where an occupant reports a potential hazard to the council, an officer may carry out an inspection and will calculate a score for any hazards they see. This hazard score will be used to decide what band the hazards fall into under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). The HHSRS is concerned with threats to health and safety, not matters of quality and comfort.
9. The bands range from A, which is the most dangerous and life-threatening hazards, to J, which is the least dangerous. Hazards in bands A to C are classed as Category 1 hazards. Hazards in bands D to J are classed as Category 2 hazards.
10. Councils have a legal duty to act on hazards falling into bands A to C. Councils can also take action for hazards in bands D to J but are under no duty to.
11. The Council’s policy is to use informal action, such as advice, in circumstances where the hazard is not serious enough for formal action or where there is no significant risk to the health and safety of the tenant.
12. It is a criminal offence for a landlord to evict a tenant without following the correct procedure, or to harass a tenant into giving up their tenancy. Serving an eviction notice after a tenant has complained about disrepair, and the Council serves an improvement notice, may be considered retaliation by the landlord. This could make the eviction notice invalid.
13. The Homeless Reduction Act 2017 places a duty on councils to provide advice and support to anyone at risk of becoming homeless within the next 56 days.

What happened

14. Mr X contacted the Council about disrepair in the home he rented from a private landlord. The Council carried out an inspection on 17 January 2019. Officer A noted the home had wall mounted electric heaters and was double glazed. There was some condensation mould to the bathroom ceiling and a small section of mould in the hallway at skirting board level. There were no issues with window openings.
15. Officer A calculated a score of 153 for the hazards in Mr X’s home. This placed the hazards into band F under the HHSRS.
16. Officer A wrote to the agent of Mr X’s landlord on 16 February 2019 with their findings. Officer A said there were no enforceable hazards present, but there were deficiencies which the Council asked the agent to fix. Officer A asked the landlord to treat the mould and fix the bathroom sink.
17. Mr X contacted the Council again about disrepair in November 2019. He said his landlord had not carried out the suggested repairs.
18. Officer A spoke with the agent of Mr X’s landlord on 25 November 2019. The agent said they tried to fix the problems several times, but Mr X would not allow access. The agent explained the landlord therefore decided to serve an eviction notice in October 2019.
19. Mr X complained to the Council on 2 December 2019. He said major repair work was needed at his home which affects his health and he felt ignored by the Council. He said the Council did not take strong enough action against his landlord after the inspection in January 2019 and his landlord ignored the Council’s letter asking them to do repairs. He also said his landlord had served an eviction notice and he had nowhere else to go.
20. The Council responded on 4 December 2019. It said it investigated the issues in January 2019 but found no Category 1 hazards, so it could not take enforcement action. It said it sent an advisory note to the landlord, but they have been unable to access his home to do the work. It suggested Mr X contact his landlord to arrange access. The Council referred Mr X to its housing options team about the eviction notice. It also suggested he take legal advice.
21. Mr X contacted the Council on 6 December 2019 as he was unhappy with its response. He said his home was in a worse state than it was in January 2019. He said the mould was worse and windows would not open. He wanted the Council to take enforcement action against the landlord because they were not getting back to him.
22. The Council responded on 19 December 2019. It repeated it found no Category 1 hazards so it could not take enforcement action under its policy. It suggested Mr X took legal advice if his landlord did not carry out repairs.
23. Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman on 19 February 2020. He said his landlord did not carry out repairs and he cannot afford legal advice. Mr X told me he tried contacting the Council’s housing options team but got no answer. Instead, he got help from Shelter, the housing charity, and his landlord is no longer trying to evict him.

Response to my enquiries

24. The Council told me the only scoreable hazard its officer identified was damp and mould. This scored in band F under the HHSRS. The Council does not enforce band F hazards.
25. When Mr X contacted the Council in November 2019, the officer dealing with the case contacted the landlord’s agent. The agent said they wanted to carry out repairs, but Mr X would not cooperate or allow access. The Council therefore told Mr X to cooperate so his landlord could carry out the repairs.
26. After Mr X told the Council his landlord had served an eviction notice, the Council said it signposted Mr X to its housing options team. The Council has no record Mr X approached the housing options team.
27. The landlord’s agent told the Council the eviction notice was served to gain possession of the home. The Council said because it took informal action and did not serve a formal notice on the landlord, retaliatory eviction legislation does not apply.

Back to top

Analysis

28. The Council’s first response was suitable. It inspected Mr X’s home and recorded the hazards it found. I have seen a copy of its inspection report which confirms this. The Council then wrote to Mr X’s landlord to ask them to carry out repairs.
29. Mr X wanted the Council to take stronger action. However, the Council acted in line with guidance and its policy. It found no Category 1 hazards so had no duty to act against the landlord. It would have been contrary to its policy to do so. The Council was not at fault.
30. When Mr X approached the Council again about 11 months later, he wanted the Council to carry out another inspection. He said the mould was worse and windows would not open. The Council spoke to the agent of Mr X’s landlord and I have seen copies of their correspondence. The Council was satisfied Mr X’s landlord wanted to carry out repairs, but Mr X prevented them. The Council asked Mr X to allow access for the repairs and did not consider another inspection was necessary in the circumstances. I have not seen evidence of fault.
31. Following the eviction notice Mr X’s landlord served, Mr X complained about disrepair to the Council. The Council did not serve the landlord with a formal improvement notice, so did not consider the landlord’s action to be retaliation. It made the landlord aware the hazards were not enforceable but asked them to consider carrying out repairs. The Council was satisfied the landlord served the eviction notice because Mr X would not allow the landlord access to the home to carry out repairs. I have not seen evidence of fault.
32. When the Council was made aware Mr X could become homeless, it gave him the details of its housing options team. Given Mrs X’s autism and depression, the Council could have done more. It could have passed Mr X’s details on to its housing options team and asked them to contact him. However, I do not consider Mr X suffered any injustice because he got advice from Shelter and the landlord agreed not to evict him.

Back to top

Final decision

33. I have completed my investigation. I found the Council was entitled to reach its decision and was not at fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman