Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council support after the Council persuaded the complainant to let a tenant remain in his property. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, says the Council did not protect his property, or cover his losses, after he agreed to let a tenant remain in a property rather than enforcing an eviction. Mr X wants the Council to pay for repairs and the outstanding rent.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 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

3. I considered information provided by Mr X. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X is a landlord. Last summer he was on the point of evicting a tenant. The Council did homelessness prevention work and reached an agreement with Mr X to stop the eviction. The Council agreed to pay the rent arrears to Mr X and guarantee the rent for the next three months. Mr X agreed to review the tenancy after three months and either renew it or re-start possession proceedings. The Council also agreed to provide tenancy support to the tenant.
5. In October Mr X decided not to renew the tenancy but said the tenant could stay until she found somewhere else to live. Mr X asked the Council to guarantee the rent for another three months. The Council declined because the tenant was not in arrears at that point. But, the Council did agree to cover any arrears prior to the tenant leaving but said Mr X must immediately notify the Council of any arrears.
6. The Council says it provided tenancy support to the tenant. This included visits; officers did not record any issues with the way the tenant was maintaining the property.
7. Mr X says that after the tenant left he found she had wrecked the property and repairs were needed. He found problems linked with her keeping a pet which was not allowed under the tenancy. Mr X asked the Council to cover the cost of the repairs, a lock change, rent arrears and removing items the tenant had left behind.
8. The Council declined to pay these costs. It said it had fulfilled the agreement with Mr X and it had not agreed to pay for damage or arrears Mr X had not notified before the tenant left. The Council said that whilst it had worked with the tenant, and made an agreement with Mr X, it was not responsible for the tenant or the tenancy. The Council said enforcing the tenancy was the responsibility of the property agent and/or Mr X.
9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council asked Mr X to allow the tenant to stay and offered an agreement as an incentive. The Council kept to the agreement. The Council did not agree to cover any other losses and it did not take on responsibility for the tenancy. Mr X worked with the Council to prevent the tenant being evicted but he remained responsible for the tenancy. I appreciate Mr X allowed the tenant to stay, rather than enforcing the eviction, but that did not mean the normal tenant/landlord relationship no longer applied. As the Council suggested, Mr X could seek legal advice about claiming any losses from the tenant.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman