Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a building control matter in 2011. This is because Mr X’s injustice stems from the work of his builder and we cannot achieve any worthwhile outcome by investigating the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council failed to notice his builder had not completed work in accordance with his plans when issuing a completion certificate in 2011.

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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and discussed it with him.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X instructed the Council in its capacity as building inspector to monitor his building work for compliance with the Building Regulations in 2011. In 2019 he noticed a leak in the roof and found the work had not been completed in accordance with his plans. He contacted the Council to complain but the Council denied responsibility for the issues. It explained for the purposes of building control the work did not have to be completely exactly in accordance with the plans and that it was not responsible for any substandard work carried out by the builder.
5. Mr X is not happy with the Council’s response to his complaint. He believes the Council should refund his building control fee but the Council does not agree.
6. The Council has confirmed it carried out several inspections and we cannot therefore say it did nothing for the fee Mr X paid. The issue in this case is with the qualify of the work carried out by his builder and its compliance with his plans.
7. When carrying out their functions, local authorities may visit at various stages but the number and timings of any inspections vary by local authority and type of development. Local authorities are not present for the great majority of the project and do not act as a ‘clerk of works’. 

8. Caselaw has established that primary responsibility for building work rests with those who commission the work and those who carry it out. This is typically the homeowner and their builder. On request and when satisfied after taking 'all reasonable steps' that the Regulations have been met, the Council must issue a completion certificate. But this is not a guarantee that all works have been done to the required standard. All the certificate can and does state is that, as far as the Council could tell at the time, building work complied with the building regulations. Any dispute over the quality of the work and adherence to the plans is a matter between Mr X and the builder.
9. Mr X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council is not responsible for the issues with Mr X’s build and we cannot therefore achieve any worthwhile outcome by investigating the complaint further.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman