Summary: We will not investigate Mr X and Miss Y’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a building control matter. This is because the injustice they claim is the result of the actions of the previous owner of the property and we cannot say the Council should provide a remedy for this.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council wrongly signed off work to a property later purchased by his daughter as compliant with the Building Regulations. He says he and his daughter (Miss Y) went to extra cost to persuade the Council to revoke its completion certificate and to put right the substandard work.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I reviewed the information provided by Mr X, shared my draft decision with him and invited his comments.

Back to top

What I found

4. Miss Y purchased a development property in 2019. As part of the sale agreement with the previous owner, they were to carry out certain works to the property before Miss Y completed her purchase. Mr X says the previous owner failed to carry out this work and falsified documentation to say he had. The Council then relied on this information to issue a completion certificate certifying that as far as it could tell at the time, the work complied with the Building Regulations.
5. When Miss Y completed her purchase Mr X inspected it and could tell the work had not been carried out. Miss Y took legal action against the vendor and Mr X entered into correspondence with the Council to try to persuade it to revoke the completion certificate. He says the Council took too long to do this and that he had to carry out extensive works to meet the requirements of the Building Regulations.
6. The injustice Mr X and Miss Y claim is the result of the previous owner’s failure to properly complete the work rather than the completion certificate issued by the Council, even if it was issued wrongly.
7. Caselaw has established that where a local authority issues a completion certificate it does not take on responsibility or liability for substandard work; this remains with those responsible for the work rather than with the Council for signing it off.
8. Mr X clearly went to some time, trouble and expense to prove the vendor had not adequately completed the work but this was his choice. His main concern is that the work is completed correctly and he could simply have sought his own completion certificate once it was finished.
9. Because the courts have decided local authorities are not responsible for issues with the work they sign off we cannot say the Council is responsible for Mr X’s costs in bringing the work up to the correct standard. If Mr X and Miss Y consider the facts of their case are different and that they may have a claim against the Council they may wish to obtain legal advice. They may also wish to seek legal advice about the possibility of a claim against the previous owner.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome Miss X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman