Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a disrepair issue at Ms X’s privately rented accommodation as there is insufficient remaining injustice caused to her from the alleged Council fault and we can achieve no meaningful outcome.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about several aspects of the Council’s handling of a disrepair issue she reported to it, at her privately rented accommodation. In her complaint to the Council, Ms X complained the Council:
1. Did not prepare a Housing Health and Safety Report (HHSRS) until a month after inspecting her home,
2. Purposefully misled her about the status of the report prior to this when she asked for a copy of it,
3. Inappropriately asked her for a doctor’s note about her medical history, and
4. Did not secure a window replacement soon enough as this was not completed until three months after the Council’s inspection.
2. In her complaint, Ms X also asked the following questions:
1. What actions were agreed after a management meeting was held about her case,
2. What actions were taken after the inspection and what was shared with her landlord at this time, and
3. For information about the Council’s service standards

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Background

Complaints

6. Complaint a) - in its final complaint response to Ms X, the Council explained that the HHSRS report had been drafted but not finalised prior to the management meeting being convened and that this was done to facilitate Ms X’s subject access request (SAR) for a copy of the report. The Council explained that had Ms X not made an SAR and the landlord had agreed to carry out the works required, then there may have been no need to finalise the report. The Council apologised that earlier information it had provided about this had been confusing.
7. Complaint b) – the Council said it did not consider there was evidence to support Ms X’s view in this regard. It said that when Ms X asked for a copy of the report, the case officer advised her of the process to follow to request it. The Council acknowledged that it may be that Ms X had asked for this more than once but that it had no record, or officer recollection, to confirm this.
8. Complaint c) – the Council stated it considered the case officer’s request for a doctor’s note from Ms X was appropriate given that Ms X had introduced her health issues and that it may have helped to expedite the repair.
9. Complaint d) – in its complaint responses, the Council did not specifically address the time taken for the repair but said that during the time the work was being awaited, Ms X could have employed a temporary solution herself to try to stop the worst of the draughts coming through the faulty window.

Additional questions

10. a) - the Council confirmed that the outcome of the management meeting was to serve a Hazard Awareness Notice and for the case officer to chase up the replacement window with the landlord.
11. b) - the Council confirmed that after the inspection, negotiations began with the landlord to secure voluntary agreement to carry out the work required.
12. c) - the Council sent Ms X a copy of its enforcement policy.
13. The Council contacted Ms X’s landlord around nine days after it had inspected the property; this fell over the Christmas and New Year period. A new window was installed at Ms X’s home around three months after the Council’s inspection.

Back to top

My assessment

14. I recognise Ms X remains unhappy about the Council’s handling of her case, but the Council responded to her concerns in her complaints a) to d) and it is difficult to see that we could add to this or what we could achieve by investigating these matters further.
15. Ultimately, any significant injustice from any fault in the Council’s handling of the matter would essentially arise from the length of time it took for the repair to be carried out. The Council dealt with the landlord on a more informal basis as they had agreed to carry out the repairs, as the Council is empowered to do. It is possible the repair might have been carried out sooner, but this may have been the fault of the landlord rather than the Council. The Council could have decided to take enforcement action but there is no guarantee that this legal process would have resulted in the repair being carried out more quickly.
16. On balance, I do not consider we can say there is sufficient evidence of fault causing injustice to Ms X in this regard to justify our further involvement.
17. The Council addressed Ms X’s additional questions in its complaint responses. Again, I cannot see what could be gained from our looking into these issues further.
18. For these reasons, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

19. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because I do not consider there is evidence of significant injustice caused by the alleged Council fault or that we could add anything of meaning to what the Council has already said.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman