Summary: Mr X complains the Council’s negligence caused him to lose the buyer for his home. He also says the Council failed to provide information under the Freedom of Information Act. The ombudsman will not investigate this complaint as he cannot determine liability for negligence. Mr X can ask the Information Commissioner to consider his complaint about access to information.

The complaint

1. Mr C complains the Council was negligent when it provided incorrect information to a prospective buyer of his house. He says the buyer to pulled out of the sale causing him much stress.
2. Mr X also complains the Council failed to provide information requested under the Freedom of Information Act.
3. He wants financial compensation for the stress this has caused.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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)
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants

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

6. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So, where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered the information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes copies of his complaints to the Council, its responses and the response to the prospective buyer’s enquiry.
8. Mr X commented on the draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

9. Mr X was selling his property. In June, a prospective buyer contacted the Council saying:

“we were advised the completion certificate for building regulation can be provided once the electrical installation report is completed and the boiler building regulation certificate has been issued, could you kindly confirm this and advise if any other works are outstanding and also if any works done so far have not passed building regs.”

10. The Council replied saying the application dated back to 2012 and a reactivation fee was needed. The officer also said he recollected there was an issue with the steels. An engineer would need to visit to ensure the property complies with building regulations as there was no technical information on the drawings and the plan had been rejected.
11. Mr X contacted the Council complaining it had given out wrong information. The Council having checked the file, confirmed in writing the only item preventing issuing a completion certificate is confirmation the electrical work was compliant with building regulations. The Council also confirmed there no other outstanding issues.

Assessment

12. Mr X says by providing false information to his prospective buyer, the Council was negligent and is responsible for collapse of the house sale and the stress this caused.
13. The Council received a question about a building control application dating back 7 years. The officer stated the file had not been seen since 2012 and the information provided was from memory. A fully informed response was made 3 weeks later.
14. Mr X is claiming he has lost a substantial amount of money because of the Council’s actions. He says the Council has been negligent and this negligence is the sole cause of the situation he is now in.
15. Adjudication on questions of negligence usually involves making decisions on contested questions of fact and law which need the more rigorous and structured procedures of civil litigation for their proper determination. In addition, only a court can decide if a council has been negligent and what damages must be paid.
16. The Ombudsman cannot decide whether a council has been negligent and have no powers to enforce an award of damages. For this reason, we would usually expect someone in Mr X’s position to seek a remedy in the courts.

Back to top

Final decision

17. I will not investigate this complaint as the Ombudsman cannot determine if the Council has been negligent. Mr X can seek a remedy in Court if he believes the Council is responsible for his financial losses.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman