London Borough of Merton (24 006 303)

Category : Other Categories > Land

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 03 Sep 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of an allotment tenancy as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant seeks.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complained the Council is not adhering to its own policy when allocating allotment tenancies. Mr X says he is on the wait list for an allotment and was negatively affected by this. Mr X wants the Council to investigate all transfers to co-tenants and to void the tenancy awarded in the case he complained about.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Background

  1. The Council operates a system by which co-tenants on allotment tenancies can become the main tenant after a two-year wait requirement. Mr X complained about a case where such a transfer was made before two years had elapsed. Mr X considers this shows allotment holders are exploiting this provision to avoid the 23 year wait list for an allotment, and that the Council is not adhering to its own policy.
  2. In its complaint response to Mr X, the Council explained the transfer to the co-tenant had taken place six weeks early due to difficult and extenuating circumstances regarding the health of the primary allotment tenant. The Council acknowledged that this was contrary to the two-year wait policy.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. While the transfer took place early, I do not consider this is necessarily evidence of fault by the Council. While policies provide a framework for decisions to be made, councils have discretion to step outside of policy, in exceptional circumstances. Indications are that this is what happened in this case and that it is unlikely we would find fault if we investigated further.
  2. While I recognise the strong feelings Mr X has about this, his complaint does not provide evidence of a systemic problem in how allotment tenancies are allocated and does not in my view provide grounds for us to look more broadly at the Council’s decisions in this regard. We also could not recommend that the Council voids the tenancy already given.
  3. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome he seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings