Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to take appropriate action against an outbuilding built by one of its tenants. This is primarily because we cannot investigate complaints about the Council’s management of its social housing, and the alleged faults have not caused the complainant a significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council has failed to adequately respond to his concerns and questions about an outbuilding built by one of its tenants.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We can investigate 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, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. We also cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
5. And we cannot investigate something that affects all or most of the people in a council’s area. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(7), as amended)
6. The law also 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)
7. And finally, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
9. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint for the reasons detailed in the following paragraphs.
11. With reference to paragraph 4 above, the Ombudsman has no power to look at any parts of the complaint about the way the Council manages its social housing or its actions as a landlord of social housing tenants.
12. We also cannot look at any matters which affect all or most people in the Council’s area. This means we could not pursue Mr X’s concern about the use of Council finances if a compensation claim is made against it.
13. And, with reference to paragraph 3, our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the Council. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
14. I appreciate Mr X has raised several questions and concerns about the outbuilding and what might happen in the future. But I am not persuaded the alleged fault has caused him a significant personal injustice at the present time, and the law does not allow us to consider future injustice which may or may not happen.
15. And if Mr X feels the Council is responsible for any damage caused by the outbuilding in the future, then we would normally expect him to seek a remedy in the courts, either directly or through the relevant insurers. This is because decisions about whether a Council has been negligent usually involves looking rigorously, and in a structured way at evidence as only the court can to make its findings. In addition, only a court can decide if an organisation has been negligent and so should pay damages. We cannot recommend actions or payments that ‘punish’ the organisation.
16. With regard to the involvement of the Council’s Building Control department, I understand it was first made aware of the outbuilding in 2019 and conducted an inspection. Although it appears building regulation approval would have been required for the structure, the deadline for taking enforcement action had already passed. So, there is not enough evidence of fault by Building Control to justify pursuing this part of the complaint.
17. Finally, as we are not investigating the substantive issues at the heart of Mr X’s complaint, we would not normally pursue his associated concerns about the Council’s complaints process in isolation.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint for the reasons detailed above.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman