Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to property assess the hazards in her property and did not take enforcement action against her landlord. The Council carried out inspections and used its professional judgment to determine the hazards were category two. There is no fault in the decision to take informal action to resolve the issues.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to properly assess the hazards in her property and did not take enforcement action against her landlord.
2. Ms X says that she has had to live in unsafe and unhabitable conditions and faced retaliatory action by her landlord.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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. 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

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Ms 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

Key facts

7. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.

8. Ms X is a private tenant with a shorthold assured tenancy. She contacted the Council January 2025 reporting repair issues at her flat. The Council asked Ms X to send photographs and videos of the disrepair and it would then allocate her case to an officer. Ms X sent the requested photographs two weeks later on 28 January.
9. The Council telephoned Ms X on 12 February offering an appointment to visit and inspect her flat. Notes say that Ms X wanted to speak to the landlord first. The Council contacted Ms X again on 27 February asking if she still required assistance. The Council arranged to visit on 14 March. It wrote to the landlord notifying it of the visit and asking if they wanted to attend.
10. The inspection visit took place on 20 March. The Council wrote to Ms X on 1 April apologising for the delay and said it would contact her shortly. The Council wrote to the landlord on 8 April setting out matters that required attention this included:
• Damp and mould growth
• Mechanical vent not connected to flue
• Issues with the waste water pipe under the sink
• Tenant reporting that dryer not working
• Damage to laminate flooring which means it is raised in places.
11. The landlord responded to the Council on the same day setting out the action it would take. The landlord reported they had experienced problems in the gaining access in the past which prevented them carrying out repairs.
12. The landlord contacted the Council on 16 April saying it had arranged a contractor to carry out necessary works including replacing the vent, investigating the damp, assessing the flooring and repairing the shower which was a new issue Ms X had reported. It said that the contractor had been unable to gain access and as a result of Ms X contacting him after 9pm he had withdrawn from the job. The landlord asked the Council for assistance to enable another contractor to gain access next week. The Council told the landlord it was unable to negotiate with the tenant regarding access and he would need to use the relevant section of the tenancy agreement to gain access.
13. The Council wrote to Ms X on 17 April in response to her emails and phone messages. It told Ms X that it understood the landlord was arranging to do the repairs but said they were having difficulty gaining access. It told Ms X to contact it if the landlord did not make contact. It said there was no report but rather contact had been made with the landlord via email and it was unable to share these with her due to data protection but said she could make a Freedom of Information Act request or Subject Access Request and a decision would be made what could be released to her. It also provided details of the team within the council that could provide her with advice on her rights as a tenant.
14. Ms X contacted the Council in May updating the situation including her declining health and inability to cope with the landlord. She said the landlord had visited but failed to resolve the issues and was now asking her to vacate the property. She asked the Council to communicate with the landlord about the seriousness of the situation and that a professional builder must be sent to address the issues.
15. Ms X wrote to the Council again on 3 June making a formal complaint about the lack of action. A further inspection was carried out on 9 June with the Council, Ms X and landlord present. Following the visit the Council wrote to both Ms X and the landlord setting out what had been agreed and the action that would happen. This included the following:
• Ms X to send her electrical inspection report to the landlord and within 24 hours the landlord would arrange his own electrician to complete an inspection and address areas of concern
• Within two weeks, the landlord to arrange to clear the gutter and take action to prevent water entering via an external airbrick
• Within 48 hours landlord to arrange a plumber to stop leaks from neighbouring flats.
16. Following this there was a period of correspondence between Ms X and the landlord regarding the basis on which she would allow contractors access to her flat. Information provided by the landlord indicates Ms X had changed the locks and not provided copies of the new keys to the landlord. Ms X copied the Council into the correspondence with the landlord. She stated she was not refusing access to the contractors but was raising concerns about the works and wanted a council supervised inspection before any works began.
17. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaint at stage one on 14 July and the stage two response was sent on 13 August. The Council took the view the reports made by Ms X were investigated and responded to within a reasonable timeframe and so did not uphold her complaint. It said some of the concerns raised were landlord and tenant matters and so outside the role of the Council’s residential environmental health team. It provided details of the team that could provide advice in respect of harassment and tenancy issues. The Council offered to contact the landlord on behalf of Ms X to arrange access for the landlord to carry out the repairs but said it would not negotiate on her behalf and its role would be only to ensure the landlord made contact with her. It did not uphold her complaint.
18. The Council wrote to Ms X on 3 September. It confirmed her complaints had completed its process and said the next stage, if she remained dissatisfied, was to contact the Ombudsman. It said she should work with her landlords to allow them to carry out the repairs and she could speak to its preventions team if she had concerns about harassment and eviction.
19. Ms X continued to correspond with the landlord regarding the basis on which she would allow access to her flat. The information I have seen indicates the landlord was willing to provide alternative accommodation while the works were undertaken but Ms X does not appear to have agreed to this.
20. In October the Council wrote to Ms X again saying her complaints were investigated and closed. It said it found category two hazards and so was not obliged to take enforcement action. It said it chose to work informally with the landlord regarding the required works and provided contact details for the team within the Council if she wanted advice on harassment.

Analysis

21. The information provided clearly shows that are repair issues at Ms X’s flat that require attention. It appears they have not been completed but this is not due to any fault by the Council. Ms X is a private assured short term tenant and so the repair responsibilities lie with her landlord.
22. The Council does have a duty in terms of inspecting private rented properties to ensure there are not hazards within the property making it unsafe. After Ms X contacted the Council in January 2025, it completed an inspection in March. I am not persuaded the time taken to complete this first inspection was due to fault by the Council.
23. The Council’s inspection found there were issues that required attention. The inspection, using the Housing Health and Safety Ratings System (HHSRS) identified the issues as category two hazards. This means the Council was not obliged to take enforcement action as this only applies to category one hazards. The Council decided the identified issues could be addressed via informal action and so wrote to the landlord setting out what was required.
24. I appreciate Ms X may take a different view on the severity of the issues in her property but a difference of opinion is not evidence of fault. The Council visited and inspected and then used its professional judgement that they were category two hazards that could be dealt with via an informal approach to the landlord. The information I have seen indicates the landlord was willing to undertake the required works but says Ms X denied access for them to be completed. I find no fault in respect of how the Council dealt with Ms X’s initial reports and the action taken.
25. When the situation was not resolved and Ms X continued to make approaches to the Council, it agreed to conduct a further inspection. All parties were present for this second inspection. The Council then wrote to both Ms X and the landlord setting out what should happen. I am satisfied this was an appropriate action by the Council and find no fault. The Council was aware of the ongoing issues between Ms X and the landlord regarding access to the property and was clear it could not involve itself in these issues. The action it took was impartial and unbiased with the aim of finding a resolution as there were outstanding repair issues.
26. I note Ms X raised concerns about the conduct of the landlord and considered the actions to be harassment. The Council responded to this by providing details of the team within the Council that could provide advice on such issues to Ms X. I will not criticise the decision not to make a referral to this department. The Council says Ms X had previously raised concerns about the use of her personal data and this was noted as the reason for not making a referral. The Council provided Ms X with the contact details on more than one occasion and so it was open to her to make contact if she required advice.

Back to top

Decision

27. I find no evidence of fault in respect of how the Council responded to Ms X’s reports of disrepair at her privately rented property.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman