Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to ensure vacant possession when his formal notice expired. This is because it was appropriate for him to take court action to evict the tenant so he could sell the property.

The complaint

1. Mr X owned a property that was let to a tenant, Ms Y. In November 2024, he served a formal notice to end the tenancy on 2 February 2025. He complained the Council did not contact him until 24 January 2025, forcing him to take court action to obtain vacant possession at short notice. He says he was put to avoidable time and trouble as a result of Council failings. He also complained about poor complaints handling.

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
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X owned a property that was let to a tenant, Ms Y. He agreed to extend the tenancy by 12 months to February 2025. In November 2024, he served a formal notice to end the tenancy on 2 February 2025. The Council contacted him on 24 January 2025 to inform him the tenant would remain in the property until evicted by bailiffs. Mr X was forced to start court action for possession at short notice, and this risked the loss of the sale agreed for the property.
7. The law says landlords need to take court action to obtain possession of residential properties. To allow time to assist tenants find suitable alternative housing, councils may ask landlords to allow tenants to remain in a property beyond the expiry of a notice to leave and may advise tenants they can remain the property until the court has ordered them to leave.
8. In its complaint response, the Council said it was assisting Ms Y from November 2024 but accepts it did not contact Mr X until 24 January, only a few days before the notice expired. Whilst I appreciate this caused Mr X frustration, the Council’s responsibility was to assess Ms Y’s housing situation and, if appropriate, assist her to find alternative housing. If Mr X wanted vacant possession by a particular date, it was his responsibility to start court action in sufficient time to achieve that.
9. There is, therefore, insufficient evidence of Council fault causing a sufficient injustice to justify further investigation. In addition, it was reasonable for Mr X to take court action to secure vacant possession.
10. We do not investigate complaints handling unless we are also investigating the underlying complaint.
11. For the above reasons, we will not consider this complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing sufficient injustice to justify our involvement. In any case, it was reasonable for Mr X to take court action to secure vacant possession of his property.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman