Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to prosecute a house owner for an alleged rat infestation. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to act on his reports of rats entering his home from his neighbour’s poorly maintained property.
2. He wants the Council to:
• prosecute the owner of the next-door property
• apologise to him
• reimburse him for the cost of employing a private pest controller; and
• pay him compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X, including the Council’s responses to his complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council that his neighbour’s house is in such a state of disrepair that it is enabling rats to travel from outside into his home. He provided a copy of an invoice from a private pest controller.
7. The Council says it served a notice on the neighbour then conducted further investigations which included a visit by the Council’s pest control officer. It says the Officer checked drains and gardens. However, he could not find any rat runs, rat faeces or evidence of rats accessing the property. The Council also says the tenant living in the property confirmed they had not seen any rats in their home, corroborating the view of its pest control officer.
8. The Council confirms breach of the Prevention of Damage by Pests Act 1949, is a criminal offence and it cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt that there is a rat infestation present in the neighbouring home.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has carried out an appropriate investigation, including making a site visit. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision not to prosecute the owner of the property next to Mr X’s home.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman