Wyre Borough Council (21 000 346)
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: There was fault by the Council as it mistakenly closed a complaint about housing disrepair. The Council’s apology and change in procedures remedies the injustice to Miss X. The Council has no powers to force her landlord to complete an electrical safety check on the rented property she had to move out from, so there is no fault on this point. The landlord wants Miss X to sign a new tenancy agreement before he completes the electrical check and the Council has no power to intervene in this dispute.
The complaint
- The complainant, who I shall call Miss X, complains there have been delays by the Council in taking enforcement action over housing disrepair and ensuring the works are completed within a reasonable timescale.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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)
- 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)
How I considered this complaint
- I read the papers put in by Miss X.
- I considered the Council's comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
- Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Key facts
- Miss X lived in a private rented house. She complained to the Council in November 2017 about mould in the house. The Council officer visited and contacted the landlord. The landlord said the house had flooded and he had involved his insurers. The landlord told the Council that Miss X had refused contractors access to the house. Miss X says the problems with the house existed before the flood and she did not refuse the contractors access, she struggled to arrange a convenient time. The Council’s housing department contacted Miss X about rehousing but she did not want to give details.
- The complaint was then closed as the Council received an email from Miss X saying that she had left the house. It later turned out the email was from Miss X but referred to the next door house her relative had moved out from.
- The Council has said that to ensure such a mistake does not happen again, its procedure has changed to ensure complainants are contacted before complaints are closed.
- The Council became aware that Miss X might still be living in the property in December 2018. The housing officer visited in mid-January and February. Miss X’s landlord said that she could move into a nearby house, which she did not agree to.
- The Council served a housing improvement notice in March 2019, requiring a number of works to be done by May 2019. After an electrical inspection, a prohibition order was served in April 2019 and Miss X moved out in May 2019. Miss X found her own temporary accommodation but the Council gave her contact details for its housing team.
- The Council noted that Miss X’s landlord had complied with the improvement notice in November 2019 and the Council revoked the notice. However, the electrical system still needed work and so the prohibition order remained in place.
- The empty house flooded again in February 2020. The landlord completed the works but said in August 2020 that he would not test the electrical system until Miss X signed a new tenancy agreement. The Council cannot remove the prohibition order until the landlord tests the electrical system.
My analysis
- There was fault by the Council, as the complaint about disrepair was mistakenly closed. The Council apologised to Miss X in December 2018, as soon as it realised its mistake. I consider this a satisfactory response, as Miss X could have chased the matter up at the time.
- Miss X also complains the Council has not ensured that her landlord carried out the works in a reasonable time. From what I can see, once the Council served the prohibition notice it could not remove it (so Miss X could move back in) until the landlord got the electrics tested. However, the landlord has said he will not get the electrics tested until Miss X signs a new tenancy agreement. The Council has no powers to get the landlord to complete the testing or intervene in the dispute between the landlord and Miss X. The Council has said that any claim for compensation needs to be made to the landlord. Miss X has the option to ask the Council housing department for accommodation but she has not done so, so far. I can find no fault by the Council on this part of the complaint.
Final decision
- I have completed my investigation and uphold Miss X's complaint. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Miss X. I am satisfied the Council has taken action to remedy that injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman