Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council allowed properties built 15 years ago to have a similar address to Mr X’s home. And that it failed to consider his disabilities when making its decision. We cannot investigate matters which took place 15 years ago. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered Mr X’s complaint to warrant an investigation. And we cannot achieve the outcome he is looking for.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr X, says the Council:
• allowed a near identical address for a new build property only 100 metres away from his home
• this mistake is made worse because the post office database does not have include the street name in his address
• failed to consider the consequences of these two errors and failed to consider the effect of these consequences on his mental health after he complained.
2. Mr X also says the Council breached the Equality Act and Human Rights Act by failing to make reasonable adjustments for his disability and mental health.
3. He wants the Council to provide the Post Office with his full address which includes the street name.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
6. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants

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

7. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided Mr X and the Council.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. Mr X has lived at his address, which I shall call XXX Court, for about 25 years. He says roughly 15 years ago the Council allowed a development to be built around the corner, which I shall call XXX Street. The properties have similar postcodes.
11. He contacted the Council because he says goods he ordered online, and important letters are being delivered to the wrong address or going missing. He wants the Council to change his address by adding a street name, to highlight the difference between XXX Court and XXX Street.
12. The Council contacted the management company of the flats to arrange for extra signs to make the address of Mr X’s block of flats clearer.
13. I understand Mr X is not satisfied and wants the street name inserted into the address held on the Post Office database. That this can only be done by the Council providing the information to the Post Office.
14. The Council says it checked its records. It also checked with the Land Registry and the Post Office. It confirms there has never been a street name included in Mr X’s address.
15. Complaints to the Ombudsman must be made within 12 months of someone becoming aware of the problem. In this case Mr X says he has lived in his home for more than 20 years. He says the properties with the similar address to his were built about 15 years ago. Therefore, it is too late for us to investigate the Council’s decision to allow the nearby properties to have a similar address.
16. The Council says it says it has checked with the Land Registry and confirms there was no mistake made when the new development was built 15 years ago. It also says it cannot change Mr X’s address as it is a block of flats, and this will affect all residents. Because of this it is unlikely that further investigation into the address of the new development will find fault in the Council’s actions.
17. Mr X wants the Council to tell the Post Office to change the address on its database by including the street address. This is not something we can achieve for him.
18. Mr X says the Council is breaching the Human Rights Act and the Equalities Act by failing to make reasonable adjustments for his disabilities and is discriminating against him.
19. The Ombudsman cannot decide if the Council has breached the Human Rights Act or disability discrimination legislation. This can only be done by the courts.
20. We can only consider whether the Council took account of Mr X’s rights when making its decision not to change Mr X’s address. I am satisfied the Council has shown it considered the impact of the current address situation on Mr X and the anxiety and distress this is causing. But it has explained why it cannot change the address, ensured extra signs were put up to minimise the confusion with deliveries and offered to contact the Royal Mail on his behalf.

Back to top

FInal decision

21. I will not investigate this complaint. The decision to allow a development to have a similar address as Mr X’s home was made 15 years ago. It is too late to investigate this part of the complaint.
22. The Council has checked its records and checked with other organisations. It is satisfied the addresses held for Mr X’s home and the nearby properties are correct. It says Mr X’s address has never included the street name. It has explained why it cannot change Mr X’s address. We will not investigate this part of the complaint as we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision not to change Mr X’s address.
23. The Council has confirmed it is aware of the impact of the confusion with Mr X’s address has had on his mental health. It has arranged for additional signs to help ease any confusion with postal and courier deliveries. It has also offered to contact the Royal Mail on his behalf to raise the difficulties he is experiencing. For these reasons I cannot say the Council has failed to consider its duties under the Equality Act or Human Rights Act. If Mr X believes the Council has breached either of these Acts it is for him to ask for legal advice. Only the courts can decide whether the laws have been broken.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman