Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with a report of dangerous masonry. The Council has satisfied its obligation by ensuring temporary safety measures were taken to make building safe. Responsibility for ongoing maintenance and repairs lay with the freeholder of the property. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council refuses to respond to his concerns about the safety of a building.
2. He says the Council’s actions have caused him to be homeless for four years. And it has put tenants and visitors to the building in danger.
3. He wants the Council to:
• confirm the building is safe
• enforce building regulations; and
• ensure all necessary inspections are concluded to certify the safety of the building

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We 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. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Under the Building Act 1984, the Council has powers to deal with properties it does not own but which are causing a danger. However, responsibility for the condition and upkeep of the property remains with the owner.
8. In February 2020 the Council visited a property after reports of hazardous masonry. An Officer spoke to a leaseholder and the freeholder’s partner who advised a builder had surveyed the site with intention of making repairs.
9. Two days later the Officer visited the site again and noted no progress. The following day they discussed the case with the freeholder who advised they were having difficulty in finding someone to make the repairs. The Council says the Officer gave the freeholder contact details of the professional used by the Council for dangerous structures.
10. The Officer revisited the site later that evening and found the contractor working on site making temporary measures to make the building safe.
11. In April 2020 the Council received a Building Notice application to carry out work to the property. It has no records to show this work has started or been completed.
12. The Council therefore satisfied its obligation by ensuring temporary safety measures in in place to make building safe. It has confirmed that as long as the building remains secure as ensured by the temporary measures carried out in February 2020, it has no authority to enforce remedial work. It also confirms it has not received any information that the condition or the structure has worsened which would justify reopening a dangerous structure file. The responsibility for repairs now lays with the freeholder.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X ’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’ actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman