Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about enforcement action the Council has taken against Ms X as a landlord and its advice to her tenants about remaining in the property. It was reasonable for Ms X to use her right of appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council:
• Unfairly served her with notices.
• Acted unprofessionally and with prejudice against her as a landlord.
• Advised her tenants to remain in her property after she served a Section 21 notice.
• Breached her data protection rights.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. 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, or, there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So, where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.
6. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Ms X is a landlord. The Council issued her with an Improvement Notice in May 2024 requiring her to carry out repairs and improvements to her property. Ms X made representations to the Council about the Notice of Schedule and the Council responded to them in June 2024.
10. Ms X had the right to appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber). It was reasonable to expect her to use that right. We are not an appeal body, and we cannot replace the role of a tribunal.
11. Ms X also says the Council advised her tenants to remain in the property after she had issued a possession order until bailiffs arrived. The Council says it has a duty to provide housing advice and did not tell the tenants they had to wait for a bailiff’s warrant before it would assist them. It also says it has no power to remove tenants from a private property.
12. The Council had a duty to provide Ms X’s tenants with housing advice. I have seen insufficient evidence of fault in the advice they provided. If Ms X considers she has suffered financial loss due to her tenants remaining in the property this is a civil matter.
13. Ms X also says the Council shared her personal data with a third party and did not provide all information requested in her subject access request. It would be reasonable for Ms X to raise these issues with the Information Commissioner’s Office.
14. Ms X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it was reasonable to expect her to use her right of appeal and there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman