Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about garage rental because there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, and it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to go to court about the losses he wants to recover.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains the Council:
• Wrongly emptied a garage he had rented from it without notice in 2021;
• Did not make him aware it had repossessed the garage in December 2024;
• In December 2024 cleared the garage again, removing items worth up to £12,000 and of sentimental value and;
• Continued to collect rent for the garage despite the repossession, costing him £1,200 which has not yet been returned to Mr Y.
2. Mr Y says the issue has caused him upset, inconvenience and a financial loss.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Mr Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr Y rented a garage from the Council. He complained the Council wrongly emptied his garage without notice in 2021. Mr Y says approximately £5,000 worth of items were removed from the garage. He believed this was a break in and reported it to the police.
7. Mr Y says the garage was then emptied again in December 2024 with items worth £12,000 and of sentimental value being taken. The Council said the garage was repossessed due to rent arrears and items were cleared as a result. It has referred Mr Y to make a claim on the Council’s insurance and has apologised.
8. Mr Y says he only became aware that it has been the Council who had emptied the garage in 2021 when he complained about the repossession in 2025. He also complained that despite having repossessed the garage, the Council had continued to take payment of rent, amounting to £1,200 for it since December 2024. The Council has agreed to refund the amount to Mr Y but has asked him to make a request for the refund to the service area directly.
9. The legislation from which the Ombudsman takes their power also places some restrictions on what we may investigate. One of these concerns claims about damages or losses. We cannot determine liability claims. These are legal claims which may only be determined by insurers or the courts.
10. Consequently, any claim for the losses, such as for replacement items, which Mr Y considers the Council to be responsible for, are matters more appropriately dealt with by the courts. Ms Y may use this process to try to get the Council to repair the road. There might be some cost to court action. However, that does not mean it is unreasonable to take court action. There is often financial assistance to those of a low income from HM Courts and Tribunal Service. Also, reasonable adjustments can be made for access to the service if necessary. It is therefore reasonable for Mr Y to be expected to use his right to go to court about this matter. We will not investigate this complaint.
11. Mr Y has also complained the Council has taken £1,200 in rent from him for the garage since it repossessed it. He has asked for this to be returned. The Council has already, in its own complaint handling, agreed to provide this refund to Mr Y. As the Council has already offered to remedy the error, it is unlikely further consideration would lead to a different outcome. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, and it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to go to court about the losses he wants to recover.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman