Summary: XX complained the Council failed to properly investigate and act on their reports of illegal eviction attempts, harassment and disrepair in their privately rented property, causing emotional distress and impacting on their physical health. The Council was at fault for delay in the way it responded to XX’s reports. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to recognise the injustice.

The complaint

1. XX complains the Council failed to properly investigate and act on their reports of illegal eviction attempts, unlawful entry and harassment by their landlord. XX also says the Council allowed the landlord to operate without a licence and has not properly investigated their reports of disrepair and Category 1 hazards in the property. XX feels the Council has treated them unfavourably because of their nationality. XX says this has caused them real emotional distress and impacted on their physical health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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. 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

6. We cannot investigate complaints unless we are satisfied the Council has had a chance to look into them first. This includes events that are linked to or ongoing from the complaint that has been brought to us.
7. XX has said the situation is ongoing and has developed since the Council responded to their complaint in July 2025. However, if XX wants us to consider issues that have occurred since that time, they would first need to raise them with the Council to give it an opportunity to respond.
8. I have investigated XX’s complaint as set out above from November 2024, up until the Council issued its final response to their complaint in July 2025.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

Selective landlord licensing scheme

11. Section 90 of the Housing Act 2004 allows councils to impose specific conditions as it sees appropriate on licences for private rental properties. These may relate to regulating the management, use or occupation of the property. Failure to comply with any condition of the licence is an offence and may result in proceedings against the licence holder.
12. The Council has operated a selective landlord licensing scheme since 1 April 2022. Under this scheme there is an area where privately rented properties must have a license. The Council publishes details of this scheme on its website.
13. The Council uses the policy to ensure it meets its obligations to enforce high standards of housing. The Council’s policy sets out how it will consider taking enforcement action against landlords in breach of licences. This explains enforcement action will be proportionate and can be informal or formal dependent on the circumstances of the case.
14. Where the Council is aware a rented property is unlicenced, it sends a letter to the landlord explaining they are required to be licensed. If they still do not have a licence after a set period, the Council may start enforcement action.

Harassment and illegal evictions

15. The law says it is harassment if a landlord or their agent does anything to interfere with the peace or comfort of a tenant, or acts with the intention of making them leave. Harassment can come in many forms, for example:
• threatening to evict someone without going through the correct legal procedure;
• threatening violence;
• disconnecting the electricity, gas or water supply;
• entering the home without permission.
16. If a tenant is being harassed and believes their landlord may want to evict them illegally, they can ask the council for help. The council should advise them about their housing rights and options. Some councils also have tenancy relations officers who deal specifically with harassment and illegal eviction cases.
17. The council has powers under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 to investigate complaints of harassment and illegal eviction, and to prosecute a landlord where they commit an offence.

Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS)

18. Private tenants may complain to their council about the condition of their property. A council has powers to enforce against landlords where it identifies a hazard which puts the health and safety of the tenant at risk. These powers involve use of the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS).
19. The HHSRS applies a risk-based approach to different hazards associated with poor quality housing. It includes consideration of matters such as damp and mould, personal hygiene sanitation and drainage, electrical hazards and structural safety. Category 1 hazards are the most serious. Councils have legal powers to require landlords or property owners take immediate action to remedy these. Councils have discretion to take enforcement action if a category 2 hazard is identified.
20. It is for the council to decide which enforcement options are the appropriate action to deal with identified hazards. This decision should be based on the HHSRS hazard score, whether or not the authority has a duty or discretion to act and the authority’s judgement as to the most appropriate means of dealing with the hazard, taking account of both potential and actual vulnerable occupants.

Direct discrimination

21. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all. It offers protection, in employment, education, the provision of goods and services, housing, transport and the carrying out of public functions.
22. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010. They must also have regard to the general duties aimed at eliminating discrimination under the Public Sector Equality Duty.
23. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts.
24. Direct discrimination occurs when a person treats another less favourably than they treat or would treat others because of a protected characteristic. Direct discrimination is generally unlawful.

What happened

25. I have summarised below some key events leading to XX’s complaint. While I have considered everything submitted, this is not intended to be a detailed account of what took place.
26. XX lives in a private rented property in the Council’s area.
27. In January 2025 XX contacted the council to complain about harassment and an illegal eviction attempt from their landlord. XX explained their landlord had come to the property unannounced and attempted to gain access by banging a brick against the window and door. XX explained they had called the police who had moved the landlord on, but they feared they may return.
28. The Council contacted XX to ask for further details about the illegal eviction attempt and information about their tenancy.
29. XX contacted the Council again later that month to explain their landlord had returned and instructed them to leave the property. XX also explained they did not believe the property was currently licenced.
30. The Council wrote to XX’s landlord to explain its selective licensing scheme meant privately rented properties in the area required licences. The Council explained the landlord did not have a licence and must apply for one immediately, setting out the potential consequences for failing to do so.
31. In February 2025 XX provided the Council with further information about their tenancy and correspondence between them and their landlord. XX explained the situation had caused immense emotional distress. XX said continued harassment and threats left them in fear of further harassment and illegal eviction. XX asked that the Council urgently intervene.
32. The Council has said it reviewed evidence XX provided, including a chain of messages between them and their landlord but found no evidence of illegal eviction attempts.
33. XX chased the Council for an update and asked it to take immediate enforcement action to deal with the illegal eviction attempt, intimidation and harassment they had reported. The Council responded to explain there was little it could do and advised them to contact the police on any threatening behaviour from the landlord. The Council explained it had commenced an investigation into the unlicenced property and advised XX to contact its housing options team if they were at threat of homelessness.
34. Later in February 2025, XX’s landlord applied to the Council for a licence on the property.
35. XX contacted the Council that month to explain they were concerned by the lack of action. XX said the Council was obliged to take action and asked it to set out what forward steps it intended to take.
36. The Council engaged with XX’s landlord who explained they were currently seeking legal advice on how to take possession of the property. In March 2025, the Council emailed the landlord to explain they must not attempt to end the tenancy without following the correct legal process. It explained any attempt to do so would be a criminal offence.
37. XX contacted the Council again in March 2025 to request an update. XX said they remained concerned about the lack of action and asked the Council to provide information about the next steps. XX said they wanted the Council to take action about the serious living conditions and ongoing risks. The Council responded to explain it had spoken to XX’s landlord who had confirmed they were seeking legal advice and it had advised them to follow the appropriate legal process.
38. XX contacted the Council again in April 2025. They explained the house contained health hazards such as mould which had gone unaddressed for years. They said the landlord had now sold the property without prior notice and was attempting to forcefully evict them. XX reiterated that the property was unlicenced.
39. The Council acknowledged XX’s email and advised them to contact its housing options team for rehousing as they needed to join its housing register.
40. In April 2025, the Council granted XX’s landlord a licence for the property.
41. Later that month XX contacted the Council to explain they were unhappy with the lack of action so far. They said the Council had failed to act on its legal duties based on reports they had made to that point. XX reiterated their belief they had been the victim of harassment, intimidation and illegal eviction attempts and said the landlord had failed to ensure the property was maintained in an inhabitable condition. The Council said it would continue to investigate XX’s allegations, and they could raise a formal complaint if they were unhappy with the action taken.
42. In late April 2025 the Council spoke to XX’s landlord by phone. They then wrote to them to confirm the conversation and explain XX had tenancy of the property and they would need to follow the correct legal process to gain possession of it. The Council recommended the landlord avoid unnecessary contact and conflict with XX while the legal process ran its course.
43. In May 2025 XX submitted a complaint to the Council. XX said the Council had failed to take effective action against their landlord, despite them submitting evidence of harassment, attempted illegal evictions, criminal damage and severe disrepair. XX also said they felt they had been treated less favourably by the Council based on their nationality. XX provided supporting evidence which included photos of the alleged disrepair.
44. The Council gave their final response to XX’s complaint in July 2025. When responding to XX’s complaint, the Council explained It had considered all the evidence XX had provided, including messages between them and their landlord, but found no evidence of harassment or illegal eviction attempts. The Council explained it had engaged with XX’s landlord to remind them to follow the correct legal process, and they should contact the police if they felt threatened. The Council explained it had now approved XX’s landlord’s application for a licence, so no offence was taking place. The Council also said it had reviewed evidence XX had submitted and this did not show any Category 1 hazards in the property but it invited XX to provide further evidence for review. It said if XX could demonstrate serious disrepair it would allocate a case officer to carry out a full inspection. The Council said it could find no evidence XX had been discriminated against or received less favourable treatment from it because of their nationality. The Council said the treatment XX had received was comparable to other service users in terms of timescales and response.

Analysis

45. XX first contacted the Council to raise concerns about harassment and attempted illegal eviction in January 2025. XX explained at that point the police had been contacted but they remained concerned for their safety.

The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. While we can consider the Council’s duties towards XX, it is not our role to take a second look at a decision to decide if it was right or wrong. Instead, we look at if there was fault with how the Council made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome. I cannot find fault with the decisions the Council came to simply because XX disagrees with them.

46. The Council explained it reviewed all the evidence XX provided, including messages between them and their landlord when considering their claims of harassment and illegal eviction attempts. Having done so, the Council concluded there was no evidence of an offence taking place that would require enforcement action. However, it engaged with XX’s landlord to remind them of the need to follow the correct legal process and to advise them to limit unnecessary contact and conflict with XX in the meantime. I am satisfied the Council followed the right process when considering whether to take enforcement action, and so I do not find fault with the decision it reached.
47. XX has said the landlord continued to harass them while the Council was considering the available evidence. I understand this would have been very distressing for XX, but that does not mean the Council was at fault. The Council correctly acted to support XX by contacting their landlord, recommending they contact the police if they felt threatened, and advising them to contact its housing team to discuss housing options.
48. The Council had regard to everything XX said and provided before deciding there was insufficient evidence of illegal eviction attempts or harassment. As the Council followed the correct process to consider its duties, I cannot find fault with its decision not to take enforcement action.
49. However, the information I have seen suggests there were delays in the Council dealing with this situation. While the Council wrote to the landlord in January 2025 about the licencing issue, it was March 2025 before it engaged them to get their version of events and remind them of the need to follow the correct legal process. This is a delay of over a month, which amounts to fault. In that time, XX had to chase for updates from the Council to find out what was happening. While the Council ultimately decided there was no evidence of an offence, this delay and need to chase for updates caused uncertainty for XX, which is injustice.
50. The Council’s process where it identifies an unlicenced rental property is to send a letter to the landlord explaining they need to be licenced. If the landlord fails to apply for a licence, the Council will then consider enforcement action
51. The Council was alerted in January 2025 that XX’s landlord was operating the rental property without a licence. It then promptly contacted them to explain they needed to apply for a licence and the potential consequences if they failed to do so. The Council followed its usual process here and I do not find it at fault.
52. XX’s landlord applied for a licence and the Council granted this in April 2025. As the licence was granted, the Council did not need to consider taking further enforcement action against the landlord and I do not find it at fault for failing to do so.
53. XX made the Council aware they believed there were health hazards such as mould and disrepair issues in the property in April 2025. However, the Council did not act on this. At this point, I would have expected the Council to make further enquiries to satisfy itself as to whether hazards existed in the property, and whether it needed to take further action. Failure to do so amounts to fault and would have caused uncertainty for XX, which is injustice.
54. When they made their complaint to the Council the following month, XX provided photographs of the alleged disrepair issues and hazards. The Council reviewed these at that point and determined there was no evidence of a Category 1 hazard and so no inspection or further action was required but invited XX to provide further evidence for it to consider. The Council appears to have followed the right process by considering all the evidence provided by XX before reaching its decision and I do not find it at fault. If XX has further evidence to provide the Council, they would be free to contact it directly to provide this.
55. Based on the evidence I have seen, the Council has generally treated XX as I would expect and largely dealt with their enquiries promptly. However, XX says they believe the Council has discriminated towards them based on their nationality. While I have identified some fault on the Council’s part for delay, I have seen nothing to suggest this was due to any protected characteristics and that the same fault would not have occurred if not for XX’s nationality, so I do not find further fault here. In any case, we cannot determine whether the Council discriminated against XX, only the courts can decide this. If XX wants to pursue this point further, they may wish to consider taking action against the Council in the courts.

Back to top

Action

56. To remedy the injustice identified above the Council should complete the following actions within one month of the date of this decision:
• Write to XX to apologise for the injustice caused by delay in investigating their allegations of harassment, illegal eviction and hazards within the property. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Make a symbolic payment of £100 to XX to address the identified injustice.
57. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

58. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman