Summary: The Council was not at fault for its decision not to take action against Ms X’s landlord following her reports of harassment. The Council was at fault for not considering whether she was at risk of homelessness in light of her reports. This caused injustice as the Council may have been able to provide Ms X with advice and assistance if it considered she was threatened with homelessness. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the way the Council has handled her reports about the behaviour of her landlord. Ms X says the Council:
1. Did not act following harassment she reported from her landlord in 2018.
2. Failed to notify her of the outcome of its investigation into harassment from her landlord in 2019.
3. Denied Ms X sought assistance with harassment from her landlord in 2019 and instead sought advice on ending a tenancy.
4. Did not respond to her reports about her landlord’s behaviour from September to December 2022.
5. Did not involve her in an investigation it carried out in September 2022 about her landlord’s behaviour.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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)
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. 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

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have not investigated complaints a), b) and c) as they relate to matters from at least four years ago. I am satisfied Ms X could have complained at the time to the Council and if she was not happy with the response brought her complaint to the Ombudsman. I see no good reasons why we should investigate these complaints.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. As part of this investigation I considered the information from Ms X and the Council. Ms X and the Council now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider their comments before making a final decision. I sent a draft of this decision to the Council and Ms X for comments.

Back to top

What I found

8. Private tenants may complain to their council if their landlord is harassing them or is trying to evict them. Local authorities have powers under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 to investigate complaints of harassment and illegal eviction, and to prosecute a landlord where he or she commits an offence.
9. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the council on or after 3 April 2018:
• they are likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• they have been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5)
10. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance says, rather than advise the applicant to return when homelessness is more imminent, the housing authority may wish to accept a prevention duty and begin to take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)
11. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help the applicants to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. This is called the prevention duty. In deciding what steps they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

What happened

12. In September 2022, Ms X contacted the Council to report her landlord was harassing her and trying to force her to leave her property.
13. The Council wrote to Ms X in early November 2022 and said it had nothing to substantiate her allegations. The Council said it had contacted the Police who told it no reports of harassment had been reported to them. The Council told Ms X that she could take civil action if her landlord was harassing her and this was also a criminal offence. At this time Ms X received a threatening letter from her landlord which she passed onto the Council.
14. In late November 2023, Ms X complained to the Council about the way it had dealt with her reports about her landlord from 2018 and 2019. Ms X also complained about how the Council had dealt with her more recent reports from September 2022. Ms X said she had reported the matter to the Police and it was incorrect of the landlord to say she had not.
15. In late December 2022, Ms X emailed the Council and told it her landlord was making serious threats against her. Ms X said she had reported these to the Police and asked the Council to take action to make the landlord stop.
16. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaint in early January 2023. The Council said when it previously wrote to Ms X in November 2022, it had been advised by the Police, at that time, that Ms X had not made any Police reports. The Council said it had now seen the Police records which showed there were several cases relating to harassment from September to December 2022 and these were currently being investigated by the Police. The Council said it did not have a duty to investigate these matters Ms X reported and it had not made a policy decision to do so nor did it have the resources. The Council said it would close Ms X’s complaint.
17. Ms X asked the Council to consider her complaint at the next stage as she was unhappy with the Council’s response.
18. The Council provided its final complaint response in early February 2023. The Council apologised for closing the complaint early and said it had made the officer aware of the procedure to escalate a complaint. The Council said its position had not changed and that in relation to landlord harassment the Council had a power to act, not a duty. The Council said it currently did not have the resources to carry out these investigations.
19. Ms X remained dissatisfied and complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

20. Following Ms X’s reports of harassment from her landlord, the Council told her it would not investigate or take action against her landlord. The Council’s reasons were that it did not currently have the resources to do this. While I recognise Ms X is unhappy with the Council’s decision, the Council does not have a duty to take action against her landlord. The Council has considered Ms X’s reports and decided not to take action and explained to her its reasons. I have not found the Council at fault.
21. Given the nature of the reports Ms X provided the Council with showing the behaviour from her landlord, the Council should have considered whether she was at risk of homelessness. I cannot see that the Council did this. This was fault. Had the Council carried out an assessment and decided Ms X was at risk of homelessness it could have provided her with assistance through a homelessness prevention duty.
22. Given the events this investigation considered were from late 2022 and it is now late 2023, should the Council receive any further reports of landlord harassment or threats of illegal eviction from Ms X, it should consider whether she is at risk of homelessness.
23. When the Council responded to Ms X’s complaint at the first stage of its complaints process it closed the complaint and did not give her the option to escalate it further. This was fault. The Council has recognised this and apologised, however I do not consider Ms X suffered any injustice because of this as she did ask the Council to consider her complaint at the next stage of its complaint process shortly after she received the stage one response.

Back to top

Agreed action

24. Within one month of my decision the Council agreed to carry out the following:
• Provide Ms X with a written apology for not considering whether she was at risk of homelessness following her reports of harassment and the threats of illegal eviction from her landlord.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I have completed my investigation and found the Council was at fault. This caused injustice. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X to remedy the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman