Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council carried out an inspection of his home. Mr X said the Council’s inspection was insufficient and missed hazards in his property. He also said the Council did not take his concerns seriously. Mr X wanted the Council to carry out a new inspection. We have ended our investigation of Mr X’s complaint. Following Mr X’s approach to the Ombudsman, the Council took corrective action on the matters complained about. It agreed to carry out a further inspection, identifying and correcting omissions from previous inspections. It completed referrals to external agencies and apologised to Mr X. The Council took the actions the Ombudsman would likely have recommended if we investigated. Mr X no longer lives at the property. The Ombudsman cannot achieve any meaningful outcome for Mr X from further investigation of this complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council conducted an inspection of his housing conditions. Mr X said the Council’s Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) inspection was insufficient, as it missed hazards in his home. Mr X said he was unhappy with the Council’s response to his concerns.
2. Mr X wanted the Council to take his concerns more seriously and carry out a new inspection of his home.

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. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
5. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
6. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
7. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. Mr X told the Ombudsman the Council should have issued his landlord with an improvement notice after inspecting his property in February 2025.
9. I have not investigated this part of Mr X’s complaint. This complaint is about something that happened after Mr X approached the Ombudsman. This is not a complaint yet made to the Council and so the Council has not yet had the opportunity to consider this and respond. The restriction set out in paragraph 4 applies.
10. It is open to Mr X to make a new complaint to the Council about this. If Mr X is then dissatisfied with the outcome, he can ask the Ombudsman to consider his new complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council, as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
12. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

Relevant legislation, guidance and policy

Housing Health and Safety Rating System

13. Private tenants may complain to their council about a failure by the landlord to keep the property in good repair. Councils have powers under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) (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. The hazards are categorised as:
• Category 1 hazards which are hazards which could cause serious harm.
• Category 2 hazards which are less serious hazards which may need remedial work by the landlord.

Back to top

What I found

14. Below is a summary of the relevant key events. It does not detail every exchange between parties. Where necessary, I have expanded on some of these events in the “analysis” section of this decision statement.
15. In June 2024, Mr X contacted the Council about the electrics in his home. The Council wrote to Mr X’s landlord to highlight Mr X’s concerns. The Council also highlighted concerns about mould, a lack of fire alarms, and cracks and trip hazards in the property. Mr X’s landlord told the Council Mr X was not allowing access for the issues to be fixed. The Council asked Mr X to provide reasonable access to his landlord’s contractors.
16. In July 2024, Mr X said his landlord’s electrician carried out works, issuing a satisfactory electrical safety certificate. Mr X had a private inspection completed, identifying unresolved electrical hazards. Mr X raised to the Council his concerns the certificate was wrong, or fraudulently issued.
17. In August 2024, the Council inspected Mr X’s property and sent a list of issues identified to Mr X and his landlord. These issues included window repairs, damp and mould concerns, structural issues and electrical problems, such as faulty extractor fans, exposed cables and water ingress into the fuse box.
18. In September 2024, the Council returned to inspect the works. It found some work completed, but some issues remained outstanding. The Council wrote to Mr X’s landlord, listing the outstanding work items. These included glazing repairs, a structural survey, mould in some of the rooms, and repairs to the extractor fans in the bathroom and kitchen.
19. Mr X told the Council he could not provide access for around two weeks. Shortly after this, Mr X complained about the Council’s inspection and the pace of the work in his home.
20. In October 2024, the Council wrote to Mr X, advising that both the Council and Mr X’s landlord had been unable to contact him. The Council said it would close its case if Mr X did not respond. Mr X replied, saying his landlord’s contractors had not addressed the issues found. He said the Council’s September inspection had not addressed some significant concerns and he had complained about this.
21. On 18 October 2024, the Council wrote to Mr X to set out its actions to date and confirm what it believed was outstanding. The Council said Mr X’s landlord was willing to resolve the outstanding problems. It asked Mr X to contact his landlord and copy the Council into any communication, so the Council could monitor and assist. Mr X re-submitted his complaint, but said he did not receive a response.
22. In January 2025, Mr X approached the Ombudsman, explaining his concerns about the Council’s inspection. The Ombudsman contacted the Council, who logged the matter as a complaint.
23. On 29 January 2025, the Council responded to Mr X’s complaint:
• The Council apologised for not responding to Mr X’s last correspondence in October 2024.
• The Council asked Mr X to set out his concerns about its last inspection.
• The Council said it would inspect again, given the time that had elapsed.
24. The Council offered dates for a new inspection, but Mr X said he would be unavailable until mid-February 2025. In February 2025, Mr X escalated his complaint.
25. The Council carried out a new inspection at the end of February 2025. In March 2025, the Council sent an updated work schedule to Mr X and his landlord, identifying outstanding matters. The Council also responded to Mr X’s escalated complaint:
• The Council accepted it had not addressed Mr X’s concerns about the validity of the electrical safety certificate issued at the time. The Council said it would refer these concerns now to the relevant trade body. It apologised for not following this up and upheld this part of Mr X’s complaint.
• The Council said Mr X’s concerns about water leaking into the fuse box had not been followed up on its second inspection in September 2024. The Council said its third inspection in February 2025 found this had been resolved. Given it had omitted this finding from its second inspection, the Council upheld this part of Mr X’s complaint.
• The Council said its second inspection report did not confirm if the electrical safety check had been addressed. The Council upheld this part of Mr X’s complaint and said its third inspection had asked the landlord to address this.
• The Council noted while some damaged tiles were fixed, others had been missed on the second inspection. The Council said the missed items were picked up on its third inspection and partially upheld this part of Mr X’s complaint.
• The Council did not uphold Mr X’s complaint about cracks in the property, stating its second inspection addressed this.

Analysis

26. Mr X approached the Ombudsman with concerns about the Council’s September 2024 inspection and the time taken to reach a resolution. Mr X wanted the Council to carry out a fresh inspection and take his concerns seriously.
27. Having carefully considered this matter, I believe the Ombudsman could not now achieve anything for Mr X from further investigation of this complaint. This is because:
• Following Mr X’s approach to the Ombudsman, the Council considered Mr X’s complaint, agreeing to complete a further inspection. It identified and apologised for omissions in its previous inspection and its communication with Mr X. It took corrective action to address oversights, issuing a new work schedule and passing Mr X’s concerns about the electrical certificate to the relevant trade body, though I understand nothing came of this referral. In sum, the Council took the actions Mr X wanted and the actions the Ombudsman would likely have recommended, had we investigated and found it acted with fault.
• On the time taken to reach a resolution, the available evidence shows the Council repeatedly advocated for Mr X and his landlord to agree access arrangements with each other, while also offering to monitor communications between both parties to provide advice. It is unlikely we would find any delay in agreeing access was due to the Council.
• Mr X no longer lives at the property and so the Ombudsman could not meaningfully achieve anything for him from further investigation of this complaint.
28. I have therefore ended my investigation on this basis.

Back to top

Decision

29. I have ended my investigation of Mr X’s complaint. The Council took the actions Mr X sought when he approached the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman cannot now achieve anything for Mr X through further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman