Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of disrepair issues at his privately rented home and that it discriminated against him because of his disability. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council discriminated against him because of his disability and provided a poor service in connection with disrepair issues at his privately rented home. He says this caused delays to the repairs and distress for which he should be compensated.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the council, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
5. I gave the complainant the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what he said.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council that it had not carried out its statutory duties in connection with disrepair issues at his privately rented home and that an officer had discriminated against him. The Council responded to his complaint under the two stages of its complaints procedure. It did not uphold it and found no evidence he had been discriminated against.
7. In its response the Council explained to Mr X its duties in relation to category 2 hazards, the type that had been found on inspection at his property, and it set out the action it had taken and detailed its communication with him.
8. Although Mr X remains dissatisfied with the Council’s response, we will not investigate his complaint because an investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman