Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s termination of a garage tenancy agreement. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council or that we could reasonably achieve anything for Mr X.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council terminated his tenancy agreement for a garage due to him using it to store his belongings rather than a motor vehicle.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

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 reviewed Mr X’s complaint, made enquiries of the Council and considered its response. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and considered his comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X rents a garage from the Council and has done so for many years. He signed a tenancy agreement for the garage in 2011 which listed conditions for the tenancy including:

“To use the garage for no other purpose than the storage of my private motor vehicle.”

6. The Council ended the original agreement when Mr X left his council property and sent Mr X a new lease agreement to sign and return in 2017 so that he could continue to rent the garage. However it does not appear Mr X signed and returned the new agreement, making the new arrangement informal.
7. Mr X has used the garage to store his personal belongings, rather than a motor vehicle, for several years. He made a claim to the Council in 2019 for damage to his belongings resulting from a leak. The Council settled the claim but reminded Mr X he must not use the garage to store his personal belongings.
8. Mr X says he has nowhere else to store his belongings and says the Council has previously agreed to this. But the Council has no record of any such agreement and Mr X’s evidence does not persuade me, on balance, that the Council agreed to this. As a result, the Council has told Mr X he has breached the terms of the tenancy and served ‘notice to quit’. Mr X has now removed his belongings from the garage and handed the garage back to the Council. Mr X complains about this.
9. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The terms of the original tenancy agreement state Mr X must use the garage for no other purpose than to store a private motor vehicle. The new lease agreement sent to Mr X contained the same requirement and even though Mr X may not have signed it we cannot say this means he can ignore it. The Council reminded Mr X of the terms of the agreement but he did not comply with them as he says he had nowhere else to put his belongings. The Council therefore gave Mr X notice that it would end the agreement and we cannot say it was wrong to do this.
10. If Mr X believes the Council has breached its contract with him he may take the matter to court. But it is not for us to say the Council may not exercise its rights to end the agreement or that it must agree to Mr X continuing to store his belongings in the garage against the lease terms and for as long as Mr X wants.
11. The Council allowed Mr X additional time to clear the garage and also offered to assist him in removing any items he does not want to keep, without charge. This goes above the requirements set out in the original agreement and it is now for Mr X to make alternative arrangements to store his property.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council in ending Mr X’s tenancy agreement or that we could say the Council must continue the garage tenancy as Mr X would like.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman