Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about action the Council has taken against Miss X as a landlord. This is because part of the complaint is outside our jurisdiction as Miss X has used her legal right to appeal and we will not investigate the remaining issues, as further investigation is unlikely to find significant fault that would justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X says the Council wrongly issued Hazard Awareness and Suspended Improvement Notices on her rental property, leading to unfair fees. She says it also altered the work schedule without telling her, mishandled her complaints, and acted with bias.
2. She reports poor communication, unclear processes, and constant chasing for updates, which she says caused her significant stress and financial strain. She wants the Council to remove the notices and cancel the charges.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal or a government minister or started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6), as amended)
5. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. The Council received a complaint about housing conditions at a property where Miss X is the landlord.
9. After receiving the complaint, the Council inspected the property, produced a schedule of required works, and gave Miss X a deadline to complete them. When she did not complete the works on time, Council officers served Hazard Awareness and Suspended Improvement Notices
10. Miss X was unhappy with the Council’s actions and complained. In its complaint response, the Council said it acted appropriately under its Housing Enforcement Policy. It said that inspections and reviews identified ongoing hazards and when informal action failed it issued Hazard Awareness and Suspended Improvement Notices. It denied any issues with officer conduct and maintained the works were justified and that complaints were considered fairly and in line with policy.
11. We are not an appeal body; we do not decide whether a Council’s decision was right or wrong. We look at whether it followed the correct processes. The evidence shows Council officers inspected the property, considered all relevant information, and used their professional judgement to take appropriate enforcement action. This is a decision it was entitled to make and further investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault.
12. Improvement notices issued by the Council under the Housing Act 2004 have a right of appeal to the First Tier (Property Chamber) Tribunal. Miss X has lodged an appeal.
13. We cannot investigate this element of Miss X’s complaint because she has used her legal right to appeal to the First Tier (Property Chamber) Tribunal. Placing the complaint outside our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because part of the complaint is outside our jurisdiction as Miss X has used her legal right to appeal and we will not investigate the remaining issues as further investigation is unlikely to find significant fault that would justify an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman