Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service’s involvement in a fire risk assessment. The Service is not responsible for some of the actions Mr X complains about. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Service’s actions to justify investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the management company for a block of flats told residents there were no fire safety concerns. However, when Mr X later received a copy of the fire risk assessment, it included several unresolved recommendations.
2. Mr X also complains the Fire and Rescue Service did not share the assessment with residents or respond to his complaint within 28 days.
3. Mr X is concerned for the safety of residents. He wants the Service to answer his questions and ensure all residents receive the fire risk assessment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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 an organisation has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. 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.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Service.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X raised fire safety concerns related to a block of flats in April 2023, which the Fire and Rescue Service responded to. He contacted it again in April 2024 as he still had unresolved concerns. Although Mr X first raised his concerns more than 12 months ago, I have exercised discretion to consider the complaint. This is because fire safety work can take time to implement, and Mr X initially believed his concerns were being addressed.
9. Mr X says the management company for the flats told residents there were no fire safety concerns. However, when Mr X later obtained the fire risk assessment, it included 46 recommendations that had not been implemented. I understand why this caused concern, but it is the responsibility of the building’s responsible person to act on the recommendations. The Service has told Mr X it is satisfied outstanding actions are being addressed within a suitable timescale. This is the Service’s decision to make. We are unlikely to find evidence of fault in the Service’s actions.
10. Mr X also complains that residents did not receive a copy of the risk assessment. The Service is not responsible for distributing fire risk assessments to individual residents. That responsibility also sits with the responsible person for the building. Therefore, we will not investigate.
11. Finally, Mr X complains the Service did not respond to his complaint within 28 days, as stated on its website. We do not investigate complaint handling alone where we are not investigating the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find evidence of fault and the Service is not responsible for some of the actions complained about.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman