Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her reports of disrepair in her private rented housing because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of her reports of disrepair in relation to her private rented sector property. She also complained the Council had issued a selective licence to the landlord, despite them not having started to address the disrepair the Council identified.

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 or continue 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 Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

What happened

5. Ms X reported disrepair in her private rented sector (PRS) property in June 2024. The Council carried out an information inspection the same day. It identified a number of disrepair issues and wrote to the landlord asking them to address these within 28 days. The landlord asked for a joint inspection, which was carried out with the same Council officer on 11 July 2024. Ms X considered her concerns were minimised in front of the landlord and complained.
6. In its complaint response, the Council set out the action it had taken and explained that its policy was to resolved matters informally with landlords initially.
7. Ms X reported further issues in July, including concerns about gas safety, which the Council referred to the landlord. The landlord arranged for a gas safety engineer to attend, but Ms X did not allow access because they did not carry identification with a photo. A further visit was carried out later the same day and the issues resolved.
8. In August 2024, the Council issued a selective licence to the landlord.
9. In a further complaint response, in September 2024, the Council said there had been a delay in addressing the disrepair because Ms X would not allow access unless the contractor had photo identification. The Council said it agreed contractors should carry appropriate identification and that it had informed the landlord about this. It had also offered a key worker to support Ms X in getting the repairs done, which Ms X had accepted.

My assessment

10. When Ms X reported disrepair, the Council immediately carried out an inspection. It identified disrepair that needed addressing and wrote to the landlord asking them to address it.
11. The law says, where a council identifies a category 1 hazard under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, it must take formal enforcement action. Although the Council did not carry out a formal HHSRS inspection, its letter to the landlord setting out the issues that needed to be addressed, did not indicate that any category 1 hazards were identified.
12. Therefore, it was appropriate for the Council to try to resolve the matter informally with the landlord initially: this is in line with general practice and the Council’s own policy. There was some delay in repair work being started, due to Ms X wanting all contractors to carry photo identification, and the Council gave the landlord advice about this, which was appropriate. It was the landlord’s responsibility to ensure the works were carried out and the Council offered support to Ms X to assist her in getting the work done.
13. Since the Council had not identified any category 1 hazards and was satisfied the landlord had agreed to take appropriate action to address the disrepair identified, it was entitled to issue a selective licence.
14. There is, therefore, insufficient evidence of fault to justify us investigating further.
15. When she complained to us, in May 2025, Ms X said she had continued to have difficulties getting the landlord to carry out repairs, but I have only considered the period to September 2024, when the Council issued its final complaint response. This is because the law says councils must have the opportunity to respond to complaints before we get involved.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman