Summary: Ms D complained about how the Council handled her concerns about disrepair and harassment by her private landlord. She said this caused her distress and she wants the Council to house her in social housing. We found no fault in the process the Council followed to reach its views. It therefore made decisions it was entitled to make.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms D, complained about how the Council’s handled her concerns about her private housing landlord. She said the Council failed to:
• issue a ban to her landlord to operate an HMO;
• investigate and take action against her landlord’s harassment; and
• act on her requests for an environmental health officer to consider her concerns and require her landlord to resolve the disrepairs.
2. Ms D said, as a result, she had experienced distress which has impacted her health, and she wants the Council to rehouse her in social housing.

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 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)
4. 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

How I considered this complaint

6. As part of my investigation, I have:
• considered Ms D’s complaint, the information she provided, and discussed the complaint with her;
• considered the Council’s responses to the complaint and the information it provided; and
• had regard to the relevant law guidance and policy to the complaint.
7. Ms D and the Council 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

Relevant law and guidance

Houses in multiple occupation (HMO)

8. An HMO is a property rented out by at least three people who are not from one household but share facilities like the bathroom and kitchen. Private landlords must obtain a licence to rent out a large HMO (all buildings or parts of buildings housing 5 or more people in two or more households). Some local authorities may also use their discretionary power under the act to designate certain areas to be subject to additional licensing, which would require smaller HMOs in the designated area to be licensed.
9. The Housing Act 2004 sets out how a local authority should review licences and circumstances where it may grant, vary, or revoke licences.

Disrepair

10. Private tenants may complain to their council about a failure by the landlord to keep the property in good repair.
11. Local authorities have powers under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (introduced by the Housing Act 2004, Part 1) to take enforcement action against private landlords where the council has identified a hazard which puts the health and safety of the tenant at risk.
12. If a council considers a category 1 hazard exists in residential premises, they must take appropriate enforcement action in accordance with section 5 of the Act. Councils have discretion to take enforcement action if a category 2 hazard is identified.

Statutory nuisances

13. Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA), councils have a duty to take reasonable steps to investigate potential ‘statutory nuisances’.
14. For the issue to count as a statutory nuisance, it must:
• unreasonably and substantially interfere with the use or enjoyment of a home or other property; and/or
• injure health or be likely to injure health.
15. There is no fixed point at which something becomes a statutory nuisance. Councils rely on suitably qualified officers to gather evidence. Officers may, for example, ask the complainant to complete diary sheets, fit noise-monitoring equipment, or make site visits. Councils will sometimes offer an ‘out-of-hours’ service for people to contact, if a nuisance occurs outside normal working time.
16. Once evidence gathering is complete, a council will assess the evidence. It will consider matters such as the timing, duration, and intensity of the alleged nuisance. Officers will use their professional judgement to decide whether a statutory nuisance exists.

Harassment and illegal evictions

17. 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.

What happened

18. Ms D rents a room in a house of multiple occupation from a private landlord. She was unhappy about disrepair issues in the property and reported her concerns to her landlord.
19. In Summer 2023 the Council visited Ms D’s property for a mandatory compliance inspection. It completed a Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) record which found the landlord was compliant with the HMO standards and no significant hazards existed but set out some works which were needed.
20. Ms D asked for a copy of the report. The Council informed Ms D about its finding and the works it had set out the landlord was required to complete.
21. A month later, Ms D contacted the Council again. She reported the property had several issues including a rodent infestation, blocked toilets, and mould. She also said she was being harassed by other tenants.
22. In response the Council informed her it had not witnessed her concerns during its inspection, and she had not made the Council aware of her concerns at the time. She explained this was because she felt intimidated by her landlord’s presence. The Council told her to report the issues to the landlord and inform the Council if the issues were not resolved.
23. Ms D contacted the Council again a week later. She again informed it about disrepair in the property, she said her landlord had hidden these when the Council inspected, and he had been in breach of tenancy law as he had entered the property without notice.
24. The Council explained her landlord could enter the common areas of the premises without notice as this was an HMO. However, it would consider whether there had been any breaches of the HMO licence.
25. Over the following month the Council discussed Ms D’s concerns with her landlord. The landlord attended the property and completed some repairs and carpet cleaning.
26. Ms D said when she returned from a trip away the carpet was still wet.
27. In October 2023 Ms D again contacted the Council about disrepair and harassment by her landlord and other tenants in the property. She said she had also reported this to the police.
28. The Council’s Housing Compliance team referred the matter to its Antisocial Behaviour Team. It also spoke with the landlord and issued a warning letter about acceptable behaviours. It found mediation between Ms D and the landlord was likely to be the best way forward.
29. A few weeks later Ms D told the Council about a leak in her toilet. The Council informed the landlord and was satisfied this was addressed in a timely manner.
30. Ms D complained to the Council in October 2023 about its handling of her concerns including:
• the disrepair and the standard of repair and cleaning done by her landlord;
• the landlord had failed to address issues of noise from another tenant and raised issues with the floors. She said the landlord had discussed the concerns with tenants, but it was continuing;
• she had experienced verbal abuse and intimidation by her landlord, and was concerned he would evict her;
• the property was unsafe due to the disrepair, ventilation, smells, rodents, electrics cutting out occasionally and fire alarm was not being regularly inspected and goes of randomly;
• it had failed to properly consider her concerns through an Environmental Health visit when she reported issues in August 2023 and her additional information was not acknowledged.
31. Ms D asked the Council to arrange a visit by an Environmental Health officer and wanted assistance to be moved into social housing due to the issues she had experienced.
32. The Council acknowledged her complaint and issued a letter to her landlord about the harassment allegations and his legal obligations. It also told her it would take longer to respond to her complaint.
33. The Council spoke with Ms D and sought her views. It said based on the evidence available it did not find the landlord had harassed Ms D. It offered mediation to improve their relationship. Ms D agreed.
34. Ms D asked the Council to escalate its complaint to stage two. This included a complaint about how the Council’s officers had dealt with her concerns.
35. In its response the Council considered Ms D’s concerns. It explained:
• several of her issues related to the service she received from her landlord. It had explained she needed to report repair issues to her landlord, which she had done. The Landlord had since addressed some of her concerns but was disputing disrepair;
• it had not found it proportionate to take any action for harassment under the Protection from Eviction Act based on Ms H’s allegations and the evidence available. It sought her views and found mediation to improve the relationship was the best way forward. It had made the referral after both Ms D and her landlord had agreed to participate;
• it had arranged a visit by an environmental health officer to inspect to assess the disrepair and odours Ms D had complained about. It would then action this as necessary; and
• it informed Ms D she could register for social housing on its website and shared information about its scheme.
36. A Council compliance officer and an environmental health officer inspected Ms D’s property the following week and completed a HHSRS report. This found there were no significant hazards in the property, and no apparent defects with the drainage or smells. There was a small amount of mould which could be removed through cleaning and some minor repair issues.
37. At the inspection Ms D told the Council about noise from another tenant. It also sought the views of other tenants.
38. Following the inspection, Ms D told the Council her landlord had harassed and intimidated her while the inspection took place. She was not happy her landlord was present. The Council’s officers who inspected found the landlord had acted appropriately throughout their visit and explained why it had been necessary for the landlord to be present.
39. The Council arranged mediation for Ms D and her landlord, which they attended. It agreed this could be extended. It informed her in January 2024 her case had been closed as there were no actionable disrepair and no evidence of harassment.
40. Ms D has since raised new concerns with the Council about harassment by her landlord and new disrepair issues, which it is considering.

Analysis and findings

HMO licence and disrepair

41. The evidence shows the Council inspected Ms D’s property and found her landlord to be in compliance with the HMO licence. This included a HHSRS report in Summer 2023, which did not find any category one hazards or any other breaches of the licence. I have not seen any evidence of fault in how the Council reached its view.
42. I have considered how the Council handled Ms D’s concerns about disrepair in the property. The evidence shows:
• Ms D told the Council about ongoing disrepair issues in the property after the inspection, including information she had not shared before;
• it asked her for evidence of her allegations as it had not observed her concerns in its inspection;
• it arranged for its Environmental Health Officer to discuss her concerns with her, who asked Ms D to provide relevant evidence. The information it received related to photos and information taken before its inspection;
• it subsequently informed her she should report her disrepair concerns to her landlord first, to allow the landlord the opportunity to address these. However, it also discussed some of her concerns with the landlord to progress her concerns;
• it considered how the landlord addressed a further concern raised by Ms D about a leak in the property. It found this had been resolved in a timely manner;
• when Ms D remained dissatisfied and complained to the Council, it agreed to complete a further inspection, which included its Environmental Health officer who completed another HHSRS report. The inspection found the property to be in overall good standard and no category one or two hazards were identified. Some minor defects were noted and shared with the landlord to action.
43. The Council’s duty to take action against disrepair relates only to category one hazards. It is not required to address other disrepair concerns. I have therefore not found the Council at fault for failing to address Ms D’s disrepair concerns.
44. I found the Council have been proactive it trying to resolve the issues between Ms D and her landlord, including some minor disrepair issues, as it was clear to it their relationship was poor. This included its offer of mediation, which has since taken place.
45. I understand Ms D continues to disagree with the Council’s and her landlord’s view about the property. However, I have not found evidence of fault in the process the Council followed to reach its views. Nor has it failed to consider its duties or powers available to it. It therefore reached decisions it was entitled to make.
46. The Council has informed Ms D about its housing register where she can apply for social housing. Alternatively, if she remains unhappy in the property, she can decide to take private action against her landlord in a court or find an alternative private accommodation.

Harassment, noise, and eviction

47. The Council considered Ms D’s harassment allegations against her landlord and concerns about being illegally evicted in 2023. It did not find enough evidence this had taken place. It also considered her reports of a noise nuisance by another tenant but did not find this was excessive and amounted to a nuisance.
48. I have found no fault in the process the Council followed to reach its view. This is because:
• it considered the information Ms D provided and discussed the concerns with her landlord. Based on the evidence available to it, it decided a warning letter about the alleged behaviour was appropriate in the circumstances;
• it found her harassment concerns during its inspection in late 2023 was unfounded as this was not what had been observed by its officers;
• it agreed her landlord may have communicated with her inappropriately on one occasion. However, without further evidence from Ms D, it found this did not amount to harassment;
• following its inspections and discussion with the landlord, it was clear the relationship between Ms D and her landlord was poor. However, the landlord confirmed he did not intend to evict her, and no steps had been taken to evict her; and
• it had regard to the duties and powers available to it and was therefore entitled to reach its view mediation between the parties were the best way forward.
49. The Council has since arranged the mediation which both Ms D and her landlord participated in. I acknowledge Ms D feels it took long for the mediation to start. However, this was outside the Council’s control as it could not force either party to agree to this. Once it had both parties’ agreement there was no delay in arranging the mediation.

Ms D’s new concerns

50. I understand Ms D raised new concerns about harassment by her landlord in early 2024 and new disrepair issues about her property. The Council acknowledged her concerns and said it would consider these.
51. As Ms D’s new concerns were not part of her initial complaint to the Council, it has not yet had the opportunity to consider her concerns. If Ms D is unhappy with how it handles this, she can raise a new complaint to the Council and return to the Ombudsman if she remains dissatisfied.

Complaints handling

52. I have also considered whether the was fault in the way the Council handled Ms D’s complaint.
53. Ms D complained to the Council in October 2023. The Council acknowledged her complaint the same day, but it did not provide its complaint response until December 2023 which was longer than the timescales set out in its Complaints Policy.
54. However, I have not found fault in the Council’s complaints handling. This is because it:
• discussed the concerns with her after she had made her complaint, which included its view on some points of her complaint and sought her views on the outcome she was seeking;
• informed her it would take longer to respond to her complaint;
• acknowledged her stage two complaint escalation and additional complaint points, and told her when she would receive its response; and
• provided its response by the given deadline.

Back to top

Final decision

55. I have completed my investigation with a finding of no fault by the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman