Summary: Mr B says the Council failed to act when he reported repair issues in his private rented property, failed to telephone him at the agreed time and closed his case without emailing him to ask for more information. There is evidence the Council took some initial action but there is no evidence the Council telephoned Mr B at the time it agreed to. An apology and amendment to the Council’s policy is satisfactory remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr B, complained the Council:
• failed to act when he reported repair issues at his private rented property;
• failed to telephone him at the agreed time; and
• closed his case without emailing him to ask for more information.
2. Mr B says failing to act has caused him frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and Mr B's comments;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided.
6. Mr B and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

7. The Council’s Private Sector Housing Enforcement Policy For the Regulation of Housing Standards (the policy) says in order to regulate private sector housing, the Council’s private sector housing teams will request information, carry out inspections, process licence applications, encourage and promote good practice, provide owners, landlords and property management agents with advice and information, investigate possible offences, and where appropriate, take enforcement action which can include enforcement notices and or prosecution through the courts.
8. The policy says the Council will use a risk assessment to concentrate resources in the areas that need them the most and on the properties in the worst condition.
9. The policy says the Council will respond to resident’s complaints about substandard, unsafe and problematic private housing and adopt an escalated approach to enforcement based on risk assessment. An initial assessment will normally be carried out and any follow up advice or action will depend on the outcome of the initial assessment, which may not always involve a visit to the property.
10. The policy says the private sector housing teams will respond to complaints from tenants as well as other residents and stakeholders about private housing, prioritising the complaints on the basis of seriousness and risk of harm. If enforcement action is necessary, a variety of regulatory powers can be used to address and resolve the issue. In most instances, it is appropriate for the tenant to contact the landlord/licence holder initially, and the Council encourages this where possible. However, tenants can and should still contact the Council directly; as it may take formal action immediately if the nature of the complaint means it is necessary to do so.
11. The policy says the Council will generally seek to consult tenants before taking enforcement action and consider any representations made by the tenant.
12. The Council’s guidance document for recording cases says officers must complete a pre inspection form in every case, contact the complainant and obtain as much information to enable a decision on the best course of action. It says cases should then be risk scored. It says if the case is low risk the officer allocated the service request will determine if any action is appropriate.

What happened

13. In June 2022 Mr B contacted the Council to tell it his landlord had failed to address repair issues involving a hole in his kitchen ceiling and a problem with the ignition for the hob. Mr B provided the Council with his telephone number and email address. Mr B then provided some further documentation at the Council’s request, which included a photograph of the hole in the ceiling.
14. The Council initially classified the report as low risk. The Council contacted Mr B on 13, 14 and 15 July by telephone. The Council followed the 15 July telephone call up by email, requesting contact. Mr B responded by email to say he was still living in the property but planning to leave by 12 August. The Council telephoned again on 19 July and followed up by email. Mr B told the Council he did not always have his telephone with him and asked whether it could email him instead. The Council explained it needed to speak to him and a call was arranged for 22 July between 9 and 10am. There is no evidence the Council made that call.
15. The Council closed the case on 27 July as it had not received any contact from Mr B and did not have his permission to contact the landlord. The Council wrote Mr B to explain it had closed his case which it considered low risk.

Analysis

16. Mr B says the Council failed to act when he reported repair issues at his private rented property. Mr B says because the Council failed to act he had to leave the accommodation. The evidence I have seen satisfies me the Council acted on the report of disrepair Mr B submitted by writing to Mr B and asking him to provide some documentary evidence. Following receipt of that documentary evidence the Council classified the repair as low risk. The initial action taken is in accordance with the Council’s policy. I am also satisfied the Council tried to follow up with Mr B to obtain more information so it could be sure it had classified the case appropriately. I therefore could not say the Council failed to take any action.
17. I appreciate though the Council did not contact Mr B’s landlord before he left the property. While Mr B says he left the property as the Council failed to take action the evidence I have seen suggests Mr B was intending to leave the property on 12 August in any case given this is the information he gave the Council. I also consider it likely the Council was seeking to obtain additional information from Mr B, including his agreement to contact his landlord, before making any further progress. I am satisfied that action did not happen because the Council was unable to speak to Mr B.
18. That leads me onto the second part of the complaint as Mr B is concerned both that the Council failed to use email to discuss the issues he had raised and that it failed to telephone him at the appointed time. In terms of the use of telephone calls rather than emails the Council says it is easier to obtain information by telephone rather than email which is why it prefers that method. There is nothing in the Council’s policy though to suggest only telephone contact is considered appropriate. In any event, I would expect the Council to be flexible when dealing with those who have complained about housing disrepair issues, as with any Council services. I would expect the Council to ensure where telephone contact is not appropriate an alternative method is offered.
19. In this case I am satisfied when officers attempted to telephone Mr B those calls were often followed up with an email. There is nothing in Mr B’s email correspondence with the Council to suggest he could not take part in a telephone call. Indeed, I note the Council arranged a telephone call with him. I recommended the Council amend its policy to ensure officers are aware although a telephone call may be the best way of obtaining information from the person who has made the report there will be circumstances where this is not appropriate for the person involved and an alternative method of contact should be used. The Council has agreed to amend its procedural/process documentation and cascade that to all private sector housing staff.
20. I do not consider it likely, if the Council had telephoned Mr B at the appointed time on 22 July, using a telephone call in this case would have caused any difficulty. However, there is no evidence the Council telephoned Mr B on 22 July. Given the Council has records of other telephone calls made to Mr B I consider it likely, on the balance of probability, the call arranged for 22 July was not made. That is fault. Failing to telephone Mr B at the appointed time meant he did not have the opportunity to give the Council further information about the repair issue at his accommodation. I am concerned in those circumstances the Council decided to close the file due to no contact from Mr B. That is also fault. I consider it unlikely though that any action the Council may have taken would have remedied the situation by the time Mr B left the property on 12 August, particularly as the Council had classified the repair as low risk, which Mr B agreed with. In those circumstances I consider an appropriate remedy would be for the Council to apologise to Mr B.

Back to top

Agreed action

21. Within one month of my decision the Council should apologise to Mr B for failing to telephone him at the appointed time and then closing his case due to lack of contact.
22. Within two months of my decision the Council should amend its procedural/process documentation to make clear to officers that although a telephone call to those who have reported private housing disrepair may be the most appropriate method of communication alternative methods should be considered when requested by the person making the report. The Council should then cascade that to all private sector housing staff.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I have completed my investigation and uphold the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman