Shropshire Council (20 003 936)

Statement Not upheld Building control 04-May-2021

Summary: Mrs D complained the Council failed to take action against a developer for damage to her drainage system and contraventions of building regulations. Mrs D says the developer caused damage to her private drainage system which will cost £25,000 to rectify and her septic tank now needs regular emptying and she has spent £4,000 on legal fees. We have found no evidence of fault by the Council.

Milton Keynes Council (19 018 291)

Statement Not upheld Building control 24-Mar-2021

Summary: Ms X says the Council did not properly inspect building works at a neighbouring property before it issued a completion certificate. I have stopped investigating this complaint and do not uphold Ms X's complaint. The outcome Ms X wants can only be provided by a court and cannot be achieved through an investigation by the Ombudsman.

London Borough of Camden (20 005 246)

Statement Upheld Building control 15-Mar-2021

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to use its building control powers to protect her amenity. Ms X also complained about the Council's refusal to investigate her complaint. There was no evidence of fault in the way the Council made its building control decisions, but there was fault in the way it handled her complaint. The Council has agreed to remedy the fault I have found.

Medway Council (20 003 650)

Statement Not upheld Building control 24-Feb-2021

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council delayed in investigating her concerns about works undertaken at a neighbour's property. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council investigated Mrs X's complaints about works carried out by her neighbour.

Fenland District Council (20 002 555)

Statement Not upheld Building control 12-Feb-2021

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to properly check his property complied with Building Regulations. The Council was not at fault.

London Borough of Waltham Forest (20 004 188)

Statement Upheld Building control 05-Jan-2021

Summary: The Council has conceded there was fault in a building control officer's work. However, it has refunded the complainant's fee, and confirmed it is making service improvements. Although the complainant considers the officer's work was more inadequate than has been recognised by the Council, the Council has investigated the matter properly, and further investigation by us is unlikely to provide a different outcome. For this reason, we have completed our investigation.

London Borough of Bexley (20 003 739)

Statement Not upheld Building control 14-Dec-2020

Summary: Mr B complains the Council should not have issued a certificate of completion for his neighbours' extension because it blocked his gas flue. He says he has not been able to use his gas supply and has had no heating for two years. We have discontinued the investigation because we cannot consider a complaint that has been considered in court.

Leeds City Council (20 002 105)

Statement Upheld Building control 01-Dec-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about the Council's building control service. This is because the Council has provided a suitable remedy for Mrs X and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more.

Bedford Borough Council (19 013 457)

Statement Not upheld Building control 10-Aug-2020

Summary: There is no evidence of fault in how the Council pursued the complainant for payment of outstanding building control fees. Although the complainant was vulnerable, the Council took account of this in accordance with its policy, and so the Ombudsman cannot criticise its decision to apply for a County Court Judgement. For this reason, the Ombudsman has completed his investigation.

Wokingham Borough Council (19 019 454)

Statement Upheld Building control 29-Jul-2020

Summary: The Council delayed in issuing a completion certificate to Mr Q and failed to respond to his correspondence. The Ombudsman finds this is fault. However, we do not intend to investigate the complaint as we consider the Council's apology, changes to procedures and offer of £100 remedies the injustice caused. And further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.