Summary: Ms X complains the Fire and Rescue Service was at fault in the way it responded to her concerns about fire safety at the building she lives in. The Fire and Rescue Service agreed to carry out a reassessment of fire safety at the building in response to Ms X’s complaint. We have ended our investigation due to the reassessment of the building and the Fire and Rescue Services’ ongoing consideration of Ms X’s concerns.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the way Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) responded to her concerns about fire safety at the building she lives in following a building survey causing distress and uncertainty. Ms X says the FRS should be ensuring the management company takes the appropriate action to ensure the building is safe.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• 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, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the FRS as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
4. Ms X and the FRS had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened in this case

5. What follows is a summary of key events. It does not include all the information I reviewed as part of the investigation.
6. Ms X lives in a block of flats and is a leaseholder of a flat. The flats are managed by a residents’ property management company I will refer to as Company B and a private block management company I will refer to as Company C.
7. In January 2025 Ms X complained to the FRS. Ms X explained Company B had commissioned a building survey showing parts of the building needed work doing to them. Ms X had asked Company B to commission a full structural survey to show how safe the building was, but it refused. Ms X considered Company B were mismanaging the property putting the residents at risk. Ms X had asked Plymouth City Council to act to ensure Company B dealt with the matter appropriately. The Council considered Ms X’s concerns and the building survey and decided it did not show such a severe risk to the building to trigger its Building Control duties to take action as a ‘dangerous building’. So declined to take any action
8. Ms X contacted the FRS in January 2025 about her concerns as she considered the survey highlighted some fire safety issues at the building. Ms X asked the FRS to take action to enforce Company B and Company C to take measures at the building. A safety officer at the FRS responded to Ms X’s complaint and confirmed they were working on a maintenance plan for fire safety provision in the building with Company C. The safety officer arranged a joint inspection of the building in March 2025. Members of Company B and a council officer also attended the inspection.
9. The safety officer wrote to Ms X in March 2025 advising that fire safety was a specialist subject and open to interpretation. And following the inspection the officer did not consider the issues Ms X referred to needed the FRS to take any enforcement action.
10. Ms X complained to the FRS in May 2025 about the safety advice she had been given for the building. Ms X considered the FRS had closed her complaint without taking action on her safety concerns despite the evidence she had provided. Ms X considered the communications she received were dismissive in tone and did not acknowledge or respond to the evidence she provided.
11. A senior officer at the FRS considered Ms X’s complaint and met with her at the building in June 2025. The officer explained that where the council and FRS both have powers to enforce in a building such as the flats where Ms X lives there was a memorandum of understanding used to determine which body would take the lead. In this case it was agreed the FRS would be the lead authority. The officer considered after reviewing the building, file and correspondence that the FRS had not carried out a full and correct assessment and so given Ms X incorrect advice. And in one issue had not responded to the information Ms X provided.
12. The officer said there should have been further investigation and additional advice provided to Ms X to ensure it gave her an appropriate response along with any supporting evidence. Although the officer acknowledged that fire safety was an extremely complex subject that could be interpreted different ways.
13. The officer upheld Ms X’s complaint the FRS did not provide a full explanation of its rationale and the review of safety advice highlighted areas it needed further reassurance of the safety of the building. The officer confirmed the FRS would arrange for another safety officer to carry out an impartial reassessment of the concerns Ms X raised and would take any recommendations forward.

My assessment

14. The evidence provided shows the FRS responded to Ms X’s concerns about fire safety at the building she lives in. An officer had attended the building and inspected her concerns. The officer’s professional judgement was that there no issues for the FRS to take action on. As a result of Ms X’s complaint, a different officer has used their professional judgement to review the matter and concluded the FRS should carry out a reassessment of the building’s fire safety. Following the reassessment the FRS will take any further action as needed.
15. It is not our role to determine the fire safety requirements of a building as this is a matter for the FRS in this case. There is nothing we can add to the investigation already carried out by the FRS and as the matter is on-going with a further assessment of the building I am ending my investigation into the complaint.

Back to top

Decision

16. I am ending my investigation into the complaint as it is an ongoing matter with the FRS carrying out a further assessment of the building.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman