Summary: Mr X complained the Council has wrongly refused to transfer his late mother’s licence for a beach hut into his name following her death. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council has considered Mr X’s request to transfer his mother’s beach hut to him.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X complained the Council has wrongly refused to transfer his late mother’s licence for a beach hut into his name following her death.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Mr X;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• discussed the issues with Mr X;
• Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Key facts

5. Mr X’s late mother Mrs Y had had a licence for a beach hut for many years. The original licence did not allow Mrs Y as licensee to transfer the licence to anyone else under any circumstances. The Council revised the licence in 2014 to include condition 13 which states:

“This Licence is personal to the Licensee, but if the Licensee dies then their partner or any adult permanently living in their home can continue to occupy the Chalet in accordance with the terms of this Licence.”

6. Following Mrs Y’s death in 2021 Mr X asked the Council to transfer the licence for the beach hut to him. The Council advised Mr X that to be eligible to transfer the licence he must have lived with Mrs Y permanently at her address. It asked Mr X to provide copies of council tax records to confirm this.
7. As the Council tax bill Mr X provided did not include Mrs Y’s name, the Council asked for evidence Mr X and Mrs Y lived together permanently at the same address. Mr X informed the Council that he had lived with Mrs Y for many years and that they had sold the family home when Mrs Y moved in to a care home a few years ago. Mr X bought another property (Property 1) and used this address for all correspondence for Mrs Y, although Mrs Y did not live there.
8. The Council advised Mr X that in the circumstances it could not transfer the licence to him. Mr X made a formal complaint about the Council’s decision and asserted the procedure for transferring a beach hut was unfair. He had understood that the beach hut could be transferred to another family member on the death of the licensee and stated they had not been informed of the change in the terms of the licence. Mr X felt the Council was penalising him as Mrs Y had needed to move to a care home
9. In response the Council confirmed the original lease was not transferable and that Mrs Y had signed a revised licence in 2014. It noted the Beach Hut Team had received an unsigned message from Mrs Y’s email account in February 2019 advising of a change of address to Property 1, but it was not advised Mrs Y had moved to a care home.
10. The Council noted it was a condition of the licence that licensees advise the Council immediately of any change in address. Mrs Y had moved to a care home in 2017, and the family home was sold in September 2018, but the Council did not receive notification of a change of address until February 2019. It also concluded that as Mr X was not living with Mrs Y at the time of her death he was not eligible to continue to use the hut or for the hut to be transferred into his name. The Council asked Mr X to remove any personal belongings from the hut within the next seven days.
11. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s response and asked for his complaint to be escalated. He considered there should be an exception when people who you live with have to move to a care home. Mr X asserted the condition on transferring the licence was ridiculous as it meant the licence could be transferred to anyone living at the same care home as his mother.
12. The Council reviewed Mr X’s complaint and confirmed it was satisfied the situation had been dealt with correctly, in line with the terms and conditions of the licence. The Council suggested that had Mr X told the Beach Hut Team when Mrs Y moved into a care home it could have looked at the situation in line with the licence. As this did not happen the Council did not consider it appropriate to speculate on the scenario.
13. As Mr X continues to dispute the Council’s decision he has asked the Ombudsman to investigate his complaint. He maintains the transfer condition is unclear and can be misunderstood. He asserts the licence should expressly state that where a person moves into a care home, the care home becomes their home address.
14. In response to my enquiries the Council states that under the terms of the original licence if a couple had a beach hut and the licence holder died, the hut would have to be handed back. The Council revised the licence so that in these circumstances the spouse could continue using the hut. It states the condition was limited to a person living in the same household to avoid it being passed on to extended family and friends, which would put applicants on the waiting list at a disadvantage.
15. The Council considers the condition is clear on who is eligible to take on the licence in the event of the licensee’s death, and that it is rigorously enforced by the Beach Hut Team. As it is not possible to cover every eventuality in the licence, the Council states it can exercise discretion when circumstances dictate. But it states this is only possible when it is made fully aware of the circumstances and all contributing factors so it can reach an informed decision.
16. The Council did not consider it appropriate to exercise discretion in Mr X’s case. It states that in considering the validity of Mr X’s claim to transfer the licence it discovered that several other conditions of the licence had been breached. It states it had received misleading information on several occasions regarding Mrs Y’s address which nullified her licence. The Council states that had Mrs Y contacted the Beach Hut Team when she first moved to the care home or when it became clear she would never be moving to Property 1, it could have exercised discretion. But Mrs Y failed to update the team with correct and accurate details.
17. In response to the draft decision, Mr X states Mrs Y had dementia and was not capable of writing to or telephoning the Council to inform it she was moving to a care home. He states he acted as Mrs Y’s attorney and continued to use the family home as a correspondence address for Mrs Y. He subsequently advised the Council of the change of address to Property 1. Mr X does not accept that had he notified the Council when Mrs Y moved to the care home that it would have looked at the matter differently.

Analysis

18. I recognise Mr X is disappointed he is unable to take over the licence for his mother’s beach hut, but I do not consider this was due to fault on the part of the Council.
19. There are limited circumstances in which the licence can be transferred when the licensee dies. Although Mr X had lived with Mrs Y in the family home for many years he was not living with her when she died. Mrs Y had moved into a care home over three years earlier. Mr X was not therefore automatically eligible to take over the licence.
20. The Council acknowledges the licence cannot cover all eventualities and that it has discretion to consider individual circumstances. It has chosen not to exercise discretion in this instance, and although Mr X disagrees, this is a decision the Council is entitled to take.
21. The Council asserts Mrs Y breached the terms of the licence as she did not immediately advise the Council of her change of address and repeatedly provided inaccurate information. Neither Mrs Y, nor Mr X on her behalf told the Council she had moved to a care home. They gave her address as Property 1 but did not explain she was only using Property 1 for correspondence and had never lived there. The Council considered this nullified the licence. Had Mrs Y or Mr X discussed Mrs Y’s circumstances with the Beach Hut Team when she moved to the care home the Council states the position may have been different.
22. Mr X believes the terms of the licence are unclear and open to interpretation. The terms of the beach hut licence are a matter for the Council to determine. The Council is clear regarding the intention behind the introduction of the condition 13 and we would expect it to apply the condition consistently.

Back to top

Final decision

23. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council has considered Mr X’s request to transfer his mother’s beach hut to him.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman