Summary: The Council was not at fault for how it assessed the condition of Mr X’s property and for how it made its decision about what action to take. The Council was at fault for the time it took to investigate Mr X’s reports about the condition of his property. This meant he had to wait much longer than he should have for the Council to come and inspect his property. To remedy the injustice caused the Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X for the anxiety and frustration he suffered.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the following:
1. The Council delayed investigating his reports about the condition of his property.
2. The Council told him he should allow his landlord’s agent access to inspect the property and failure to do so could result in the Council not providing further assistance.
3. The Council did not take appropriate enforcement action despite finding category one hazards at the property.
4. The Council downgraded category one hazards to category two when it initially inspected Mr X’s property.
5. The Council restricted Mr X’s contact, referred to his correspondence as harassment and threatened legal action against him.
2. Mr X said as a result of the Council’s actions he was exposed to retaliatory eviction and had to live in a property in a poor state of repair.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)
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. I have not investigated complaint e). This is because it was not included as part of Mr X’s complaint to the Council and is a separate matter which I cannot see he has complained about to the Council. Mr X would need to complain to the Council in the first instance to allow it the opportunity to respond to his concerns before we can consider it.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Mr X 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

Law and guidance

9. 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).
10. 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.
11. The Housing Act 2024, section 5 says if a council considers a category one hazard exists in a property it must take the appropriate enforcement action in relation to that hazard. This means serving one of the following:
• Hazard awareness notice.
• Prohibition order.
• Improvement notice.
• Emergency remedial action or emergency prohibition order.
• Demolition order.
• Declaring the area where the property is to be a clearance area.
12. Where a council decides to serve a hazard awareness notice for the existence of a category one hazard, the hazard awareness notice must specify:
• The nature of the hazard.
• The deficiency giving rise to the hazard.
• The premises where the hazard exists.
• The councils reasons for deciding to serve a hazard awareness notice, including the reasons why service this type of notice is the most appropriate course of action.
• Details of any remedial action the council considers is appropriate to take. (Housing Act 2004, section 28)
13. It is for the council to decide which of the above is the appropriate action to deal with the hazard. 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.

What happened

14. There has been extensive correspondence between Mr X and the Council. In this section of the statement I have just referred to the key points and have not referenced every piece of correspondence.
15. Mr X lived in private rented property. In November 2024, Mr X contacted the Council to report the poor condition of his property. The Council told him it would place him on a waiting list to have his property inspected.
16. After further correspondence between Mr X and the Council in the early part of 2025, Mr X complained to the Council in March 2025. Mr X complained about the time taken to investigate his concerns and that the Council had told him he should allow his landlord to inspect the property following the landlord’s request to do this.
17. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint in April 2025. The Council said Mr X should give his landlord the opportunity to investigate the issues he raised at the property and an inspection may be necessary to do this. The Council said it told him in February 2025 that refusing to allow the landlord to inspect the property was an obstruction. The Council said it stood by this advice. The Council told Mr X to seek legal advice about his concerns with getting an independent surveyor to inspect his property.
18. Mr X asked the Council to consider his complaint at the next stage of its process in mid-April 2025. Mr X said he did not want the same agency he had an issue with to inspect his property as they were not impartial. Mr X said he did not refuse the landlord access but just wanted to film the inspection and asked the Council whether he had the right to have an independent survey.
19. In mid-April 2025, Mr X had a possession hearing as his landlord was seeking to remove him from the property. At the hearing the judge told Mr X to obtain a HHSRS inspection before the next hearing date at the end of May 2025.
20. The Council provided its final complaint response at the end of April 2025. The Council said it was not for it to intervene and decide who was a suitable surveyor to inspect Mr X’s property or whether he should film the survey. The Council said this was for Mr X and his landlord to resolve. The Council said it would carry out a HHSRS inspection of Mr X’s property as soon as its team had capacity.
21. In early May 2025, the Council carried out a HHSRS inspection of Mr X’s property. The Council found the presence of both category one and two hazards at the property.
22. In mid-May 2025, the Council wrote to Mr X’s landlord about the issues at the property.
23. In June 2025, the Council sent a hazard awareness notice to Mr X’s landlord. The Council explained it decided to send a hazard awareness notice because it considered this type of notice was proportionate to the health and safety risks. The Council also said it believed the remedial works needed to reduce the hazards to an acceptable level were practicable and the landlord had provided proposals for completing the majority of the work within a reasonable timescale.
24. Mr X sent the Council a pre-action protocol letter in June 2025. Mr X argued the Council’s enforcement policy was unlawful as it said enforcement action was a last resort and promoted informal engagement with the landlord in the first instance. Mr X said the Council should take formal enforcement action where it identified a category one hazard.
25. The Council responded to Mr X’s pre-action protocol letter in late June 2025. The Council denied Mr X’s claims about its enforcement policy.
26. In early July 2025, the Council wrote to Mr X. The Council explained it had restricted Mr X’s communication due to the volume of correspondence and the content of the correspondence which the Council said it believed was harassment towards its officers. The Council told Mr X if he continued to send such correspondence it would start legal proceedings against him.
27. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman in early July 2025.

Analysis

Complaint a) The Council delayed investigating reports about the condition of Mr X’s property.

28. Mr X initially reported the condition of his property to the Council in late November 2024. It took the Council until early May 2025, to inspect Mr X’s property. This was fault.
29. While the Council explained Mr X was on a waiting list and the Council would inspect the property when it had capacity to do so, I consider a six month wait was excessive.
30. Given the amount of issues Mr X reported to the Council and the fact some of them turned out to be category one hazards the Council should have inspected his property sooner. Mr X was also going through a possession hearing with his landlord, where he could use evidence of disrepair to defend against his landlord’s claim for possession. As a result of the delay Mr X made a formal complaint to the Council and it took longer than it should have to serve the landlord with a hazard awareness notice.
31. Normally in situations like this we would recommend service improvements for the Council to address its backlog of cases waiting for inspections. In response to my draft decision the Council confirmed it had put in place some processes to help landlords and tenants work together to address any issues with the condition of a property, as well as triaging complaints to ensure the most serios are looked at first. The Council confirmed its waiting list for inspections had reduced significantly and it had taken on further staff to address the remaining backlog of cases. In light of this we did not make a service improvement for the Council to address its backlog.

Complaint b) The Council told Mr X he should allow his landlord’s agents access to inspect the property and failure to do so could result in the Council not providing further assistance

32. I do not consider the Council at fault here. Ultimately it is Mr X’s landlord’s responsibility to rectify the repairs in his property. In order to do this his landlord may well need to access the property to see what works were needed, therefore I do not consider the advice the Council gave Mr X was inappropriate.

Complaint c) The Council did not take appropriate enforcement action despite finding category one hazards at the property

33. Our role is not to ask whether the Council could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with enforcement action it decided upon. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decision. 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.
34. During the Council’s inspection of Mr X’s property it found category one and category two hazards. The Council can serve a landlord with a hazard awareness notice where there are category one hazards present as outlined in the Housing Act 2004. However there are certain things the hazard awareness notice must state as outlined above in paragraph 12.
35. The hazard awareness notice the Council sent Mr X’s landlord specified the nature of the hazard, the deficiency causing the hazard, possible remedial works and the Council’s reasons for deciding to serve a hazard awareness notice. When deciding to send a hazard awareness notice the Council considered the works needed to reduce the hazards to an acceptable level were practicable and that Mr X’s landlord had already sent it proposals to complete the works.
36. I recognise Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision on the type of enforcement action it should have taken, however on balance I am satisfied there was no fault in how the Council decided what enforcement action to take. I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong.

Complaint d) The Council downgraded category one hazards to category two when it initially inspected Mr X’s property

37. Mr X says the Council should have found more category one hazards at his property when it carried out its HHSRS inspection and believes the Council deliberately downgraded hazards to avoid having to take formal enforcement action.
38. I have considered the HHSRS report carried out at Mr X’s property. The report details each hazard and lists the deficiencies associated with it. The report also provides the surveyors justification for each hazard score. I am satisfied the Council has looked at each hazard, given it a score and provided its reasons for doing so. I recognise Mr X disagrees with the Council’s view on how it categorised hazards, however I am satisfied there was no fault in how the Council made its decisions.

Back to top

Agreed Action

39. Within one month of my final decision the Council agreed to carry out the following:
• Apologise to Mr X for the injustice caused for the time it took to inspect his 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.
• Pay Mr X £200 to recognise the frustration and anxiety he experienced as a result of these delays, particularly as he was going through possession proceedings with his landlord.
40. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

I find fault causing injustice. The Council agreed to the above actions to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman