Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about building enforcement because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to take the matter to court who are better placed to consider the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has overcharged him for emergency building work carried out by contractors working on its behalf, which he says took 45 minutes, but he was charged an hourly rate for eight hours. He also feels the work was not needed and says he had already arranged for work to be carried out at a later date.
2. Mr Y says he has been invoiced for a significantly higher amount than he should have been and feels taken advantage of by the contractors.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The law 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)
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 another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The legislation from which the Ombudsman takes their power also places some restrictions on what we may investigate.
7. It is for the courts, rather than the Ombudsman, to decide if the Council should have proceeded under section 77 of the Building Act 1984, as opposed to using section 78 of the same act, to carry out immediate repairs which it has then charged Mr Y for.
8. If Mr Y approaches the court for this and is able to show it should have proceeded under section 77, he may be able to recover the cost of the invoice or be able to challenge the invoice’s enforcement. The court can also consider how much Mr Y should pay if he is liable for the costs and consider how long the works undertaken would reasonably have taken and consider Mr Y’s view that he has been overcharged by the contractor.
9. We are not able to decide liability or award compensation in the way the courts can. As the courts can decide this, it is better placed to consider the complaint. There might be some cost to court action. However, that does not mean it is unreasonable to take court action. There is often financial assistance to those of a low income from HM Courts and Tribunal Service. Also, reasonable adjustments can be made for access to the service if necessary. It is therefore reasonable for Mr Y to be expected to use is right to go to court about this matter. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to take the matter to court who are better placed to consider the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman