Summary: Miss X complained about the Council re-housing tenants whom it had placed with her private rented accommodation. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Miss X, complained about the Council rehousing two tenants who it had arranged to be housed in her private rented accommodation. This meant that they left at short notice and she had to find new tenants when they left. She believes the Council may be conspiring with letting agencies to make profit from private landlords.

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
• 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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Miss X submitted with her complaint. Miss X has commented on a draft copy of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Miss X says that after accepting a prospective tenant from a letting agency the tenant ended her tenancy shortly before renewal in early 2020 because she had found a housing association tenancy. The next tenant was not put forward by an agency but was referred directly by the Council. In July 2020 this tenant also gave notice saying that she had secured housing association accommodation shortly before the tenancy was due for renewal.
5. Miss X complained to the Council suggesting that it was colluding with the letting agency to maintain a regular turn-around of tenants at the landlord’s expense in finders’ fees.
6. The Council says both tenants made successful bids for social housing after being on the register for some time and that it has no control of tenant’s bidding choices. The agency was not involved with the second letting so no fees were obtained from Miss X in any case.
7. There is no evidence of any procedural fault in the information which Miss X has provided with her complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman