Summary: Mr X complained that the Council’s building control officer asked him to carry out unnecessary works to his property in order to obtain building approval. We have not investigated this complaint as it is unlikely to result in a finding of fault or any other meaningful outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council’s building inspector asked him to carry out works to his property, which were not necessary. He said this has caused him avoidable financial loss.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the relevant law and guidance as set out below.
7. I considered all comments made by Mr X and the Council on a draft decision before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

8. Most building work requires building regulation approval. Building regulations set out requirements and guidance that builders and building owners are required to follow. The purpose of the regulations is to make sure buildings are safe for those that use them or live around them.
9. Building regulations approval can be granted by council’s acting as building control authorities, or by independent ‘approved’ inspectors. Council’s employ building control officers (BCOs) to carry out this work.
10. The courts have said that councils are not liable for pure economic loss arising from issues regarding the quality of building works.

What happened

11. Two years ago the Council granted building control approval for Mr X’s extension.
12. Mr X disputes that several of the measures the Council said he needed to get approval were necessary. These included but were not limited to, smoke seals on his fire door, an extractor fan and changes to the roof.
13. The evidence shows the Council advised Mr X regarding these issues and when Mr X challenged their necessity, the Council’s building control officer responded to explain why they were needed.
14. The Council also informed Mr X that it was reasonable to expect his builder to be aware of what was needed to secure compliance with building regulations.
15. I have not listed all the building changes here that Mr X complained were not necessary, as it would be impractical to do so and we investigated many of these in a previous Ombudsman decision in October 2021.
16. Mr X complained to the Council about the outstanding issues in May 2022 and the Council addressed his concerns in a complaint response a month later.

My findings

17. Before we begin or continue our investigations we consider two, linked questions which are:
• Is it likely there was fault?
• Is it likely any fault caused a significant injustice?
18. If at any point during our involvement with a complaint, we are satisfied the answer to either question is no, we may decide:
• Not to investigate; or
• To end an investigation we have already started.
19. It is not for the Ombudsman to investigate the merits of decisions made by qualified professionals provided there is no evidence of fault in the decision making process.
20. In this case, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigating this matter further. This is because:
• The Council does not act as a clerk of works or a site manager and the responsibility for compliance with the regulations rests with the building owners and builders. The council’s role is to maintain the building standards for the public in general rather than protect the private interests of an individual.
• The evidence seen so far shows the Council had regard to public safety when it made its decisions regarding the measures needed for Mr X’s extension. This is action we would expect to see.
• There is no meaningful outcome that we could achieve for Mr X in relation to this complaint as he now has building control approval and the Council is not liable for pure economic loss arising from issues with the building works.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I have decided not to investigate this matter further as this is unlikely to result in a finding of fault, or any other meaningful outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman