Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the licensing of private rented housing and enforcement notices served on the freeholder and Mr X who is a leaseholder in the same building. This was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner. We will not investigate the Council’s decision to apply its Unreasonable & Unreasonably Persistent Complainants Policy. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to resolve his complaint about the failure of the freeholder to a building in which he has a flat to repair a corroded metal external staircase. He says this has affected his ability to sell or rent out his flat. He says he has been told he can no longer complain about this because he has been subject to a persistent complainants policy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, 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. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X has been complaining for a number of years about a corroded metal emergency staircase which is at the rear of a building in which he has a lease of the basement flat. He has challenged an emergency prohibition order served on him in 2013 which is still in force. He has also complained about the Council’s application of Part 2 and Part 3 of the Housing Act 2004 (HMO licensing and selective licensing) for the premises in 2018. The Council served a further improvement notice on him in 2019 when in the same year it revoked a similar notice served on the freeholder of the building.
7. Mr X says the failure of the Council to take action against the freeholder over the staircase has left him with difficulty selling or renting out his flat and that the notice served on the freeholder should not have been revoked because the staircase has not been satisfactorily repaired or replaced.
8. In May 2021 Mr X was told he could no longer complain about these matters because he has been doing so for a number of years. The Council applied its Unreasonable & Unreasonably Persistent Complainants Policy to him and advised his legal representatives of its decision.
9. Finding
10. We will not exercise discretion to consider these complaints which received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. I have seen no evidence to suggest Mr X could not have complained to us sooner. Indeed, the Council advised Mr X to complain to the Ombudsman in April 2018 with regard to the licensing matters.
11. The notices served on Mr X carried a right of appeal to the Residential Property Tribunal and he would have been advised to pursue this remedy had he contacted us at the time. He was clearly advised of the appeal rights on the notices.
12. The Council applied its unreasonable complainants procedure because Mr X had exhausted the formal complaints procedure and was making unreasonable demands on officer time concerning a matter which was closed. The Ombudsman may not question the merits of decisions which have been made in a proper manner. This means we will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the licensing of private rented housing and enforcement notices served on the freeholder and Mr X who is a leaseholder in the same building. This was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner. We will not investigate the Council’s decision to apply its Unreasonable & Unreasonably Persistent Complainants Policy. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman