Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that she was incorrectly advised to seek reports for a tenanted home she owns. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault with how the Council decided to reimburse Mrs X.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains that the Council incorrectly advised her that she would need to obtain a new Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) and Electrical Installation Condition Report (EICR) in order to be compliant with licence conditions for a tenanted home she owns.

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, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

(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 the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X is a landlord of a tenanted property. The Council carried out an inspection and advised her that she needed to obtain a new EPC and new EICR in order to be compliant with her licence.
6. The EICR inspector found that part of the property’s electrical system was in disrepair and needed repairing. Mrs X arranged for the repairs and an EICR and an EPC were issued.
7. The Council later accepted that neither the EPC nor EICR were needed yet. It apologised to Mrs X for its mistake and reimbursed her for the cost of the reports. The Council refused to reimburse Mrs X for the work carried out to the electrical system because it considered this to be Mrs X’s responsibility as a landlord.
8. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council. Its apology and reimbursement of the reports is what we would expect to achieve if we were to investigate.
9. I have considered Mrs X’s view that the Council should reimburse her for the work carried out to meet the requirements of an EICR. However, the work was clearly needed to repair a faulty electrical system in order to make it safe. Whilst I acknowledge that this may not have come to light if it wasn’t for the Council’s inaccurate advice, I am also of the view that the responsibility for these repairs was Mrs X’s. I therefore do not consider there to be any evidence of fault in the Council’s refusal to reimburse her for these costs.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman