Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions in listing a property as an asset of community value (ACV) . The complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. The complainant had a right of appeal to a tribunal against the ACV listing.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Mr X, complains the Council has treated him unfairly throughout the process of listing his pub as an Asset of Community Value (ACV).
2. He also complains the Council gave him the wrong information about the date for applying for compensation.
3. Mr X wants the Council to remove the property from the list, or consider his application for compensation

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. The Localism Act 2011 allows for listing land as an ‘asset of community value’ (ACV). Where land is listed, a community group can bid for the asset should it come on the market. An owner cannot sell the property during the ‘moratorium period’ which allows time for the community group to raise the funding to buy the asset.
9. A person affected can ask the Council to review its ACV decision. The Assets of Community Value (England) 2012 regulations provide a right of appeal to the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) against the Council’s review decision. There is a right to appeal against the listing and for compensation. For example, for loss or expense due to the land being listed as an AVC, delay entering into a binding sale, and for legal expenses incurred in a successful appeal to the Tribunal.
10. In July 2021 the Council listed Ms X’s property as an ACV.
11. Mr X says he was aware of his right to appeal to the FTT. However, he decided not to appeal because of the issue of funding and the uncertainty of the outcome.
12. The complaint about the Council’s decision to list the property as an ACV is outside the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman.
13. I have considered whether to exercise discretion in this case. I have decided not to do so as it was reasonable for Mr X to use her right of appeal. The Tribunal can decide whether the property listing as an AVC was made on proper grounds. It is not necessary to have professional representation at Tribunals. Submissions can be made in writing and some costs may be recoverable.
14. Mr X also complains he was given the wrong information about the date from which he should claim compensation and therefore applied too late.
15. The Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012 says that an owner or former owner of listed land (other than certain authorities or bodies listed in the Regulations) is entitled to compensation in certain circumstances.
16. A claim for compensation must be made within thirteen weeks after the loss or expense was incurred.
17. A Council Officer wrote to Mr X’s legal representative, setting out the requirements of the Regulations for compensation. He also stated:

“My understanding of this is that the review process will need to be completed first as it possible that a decision can be overturned by that process.”

It is regrettable the Officer stated this. However, he also quoted the relevant section of the regulations. It is reasonable to expect a legal advisor to make the necessary checks on the rules for compensation claims.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. He had a right of appeal to a tribunal against the ACV listing.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman