Summary: We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about an Improvement Notice. This is because it was reasonable for Ms B to use her right of appeal to the tribunal. An investigation solely into Ms B’s complaint about officer conduct is not justified.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Ms B, is a private landlord and complains that the Council wrongly issued her with an Improvement Notice which requires her to make changes to the heating system at her property. Ms B says the changes are not needed and her tenant has now moved out. Ms B also complains about the actions of the Council officer who issued the notice. Ms B says the officer was threatening and did not communicate with her in a constructive manner.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. The Act 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)
4. 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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Ms B.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms B had a right of appeal to the Residential Property Tribunal against the Improvement Notice issued by the Council. I find it was reasonable for Ms B to use this statutory right of appeal to challenge the notice.
8. The tribunal is in the best position to decide such matters and it is not our role to provide an alternative right of appeal. So, we will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about the Improvement Notice.
9. Ms B also complains about the actions of the officer who issued the notice. I find an investigation solely into this part of Ms B’s complaint is not justified. This is because it appears most of Ms B’s concerns about the officer’s conduct are linked to the officer’s decision to issue the Improvement Notice. This is a matter for the tribunal.
10. Also, Ms B’s complaint to the Council about this officer is about the officer’s suggestion of an appointment at the property at the same time as when Ms B and an estate agent would be at the property. Ms B did not agree to this and changed the appointment. There is not enough evidence of fault by this officer to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because it was reasonable for Ms B to put in an appeal to the Residential Property Tribunal. An investigation solely into Ms B’s complaint about officer conduct is not justified.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman