Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s building control service. Mr X says the Council was negligent. We cannot decide whether the Council is negligent. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to ask the courts to consider this matter.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council approved non-compliant and unsafe construction at his property. He says the Council admits the work does not meet building regulations and refuses to take enforcement action against the builder. He also complains it has refused his insurance claim, refused to take enforcement action, declined to revoke previous approvals, and failed to respond to a formal compensation claim.

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. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X believes the Council failed to properly inspect his building works and will not issue a completion certificate. However, while the Council will normally visit the site at various stages of the build, it 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.
7. Mr X says he has suffered financial losses because of the defective work and the Council should reimburse him for the money he paid a builder who carried out sub-standard work. He also wants the Council to pay for the demolition of the building and rebuilding costs. He made a claim on the Council’s insurers which was refused. The Council’s insurers explained its reasons for refusing Mr X’s claim, setting out its’ defence against a negligence claim on this case.
8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because it is about negligence which is a legal matter for the courts to consider and decide. We cannot decide a negligence claim. Deciding whether an organisation has been negligent usually involves looking rigorously, and in a structured way, at evidence as only the court can, to make its findings. Also, only a court can decide if an organisation has been negligent and so should pay any damages sought. We cannot recommend actions or payments that ‘punish’ the Council. We would expect someone in Mr X’s position to seek a remedy in the courts, either directly or via their insurers.
9. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to use his right to pursue his claim in the courts if he disagrees with the decision to refuse his claim and wants to challenge it further.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is about negligence which is a legal matter for the courts to consider and decide. It is reasonable to expect him to use his right to make his claim in the courts

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman