Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to act against one of its tenants, his neighbour. We ended our investigation because we have no power to investigate the Council’s actions as they relate to its role as a social housing landlord.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council has failed to act against his neighbour, who is one of its tenants. Mr X said his neighbour has:
• built a shed within his garden near the shared boundary;
• built another shed on land outside his garden;
• opened a gateway in the rear fence of his garden;
• dumped rubbish on land outside his garden, on the estate where Mr X lives;
• planted flowers on the land outside his garden; and
• parked his car on the small estate where Mr X lives.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with 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, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

3. We 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I read the complaint and discussed it with Mr X and I read the Council’s response to the complaint.
5. I gave Mr X and the Council an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered the comments I received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Social housing provider complaints

6. Complaints about the management or provision of social housing by councils are outside our remit.
7. The Housing Ombudsman Service may consider complaints from tenants about social housing landlords.

Planning law and guidance

8. Not all development requires planning permission from local planning authorities. Certain developments are deemed permitted, providing they fall within limits set within regulations. This type of development is known as ‘permitted development’.
9. Planning enforcement is discretionary and formal action should happen only when it would be a proportionate response to the breach. When deciding whether to enforce, councils should consider the likely impact of harm to the public and whether they might grant approval if they were to receive an application for the development or use. Government guidance encourages councils to resolve issues through negotiation and dialogue with developers.

Fly-tipping

10. Councils have environmental protection powers to control illegal dumping of waste, or ‘fly-tipping’. Councils may also address illegal dumping:
• as social landlords, if the incident involves its tenant(s); or
• using powers to address anti-social behaviour.

What happened

11. Mr X owns the freehold of a house on a small, gated, estate. The vehicle entrance gate is operated by an electronic fob key, which the Council issues to residents. Other houses on the estate are owned by the Council, which lets them to tenants as a social landlord.
12. Behind Mr X’s home is a fence, beyond which are other council-owned houses. Mr X complained about the tenant of one of these houses (the neighbour).
13. Mr X complained that the neighbour:
• inserted a gate into the fence that opened on to the common area of the small private estate;
• built a shed in his own garden, near the boundary, and another shed on common area land of the estate;
• planted flowers on the border outside his fence and in hanging baskets on the fence;
• parked his car inside the small, gated estate; and
• ‘Dumped all his rubbish’ on the common areas. Mr X sent videos of the neighbour carrying part of a sofa out of his garden and putting it inside the shed that is outside his garden, on estate land.
14. Mr X complained to the Council. The Council spoke to the neighbour about parking his vehicle inside the gated estate, as it suspected he had been given a fob key by another tenant. The neighbour denied this, but the Council arranged for the lock mechanism to be changed and residents were given new fob keys.
15. The Council also wrote to the neighbour about the access gate made in the rear fence and asked him to restore it to its original state.
16. Mr X said the neighbour removed the gate but replaced it with a fence panel that can easily be removed. Mr X would like the Council to take further action against his neighbour.

My findings

17. The main part of Mr X’s complaint relates to the Council’s actions and dealings with Mr X’s neighbour as a tenant. This is outside our remit and we have no power to investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint.
18. Mr X also complained about development on the land (the gateway in the fence and sheds) and dumping of rubbish. Beyond its role as a social housing landlord, the Council also has powers to control development on land, fly-tipping and anti-social behaviour, so it would be possible for me to investigate these issues further. However, I do not consider I should investigate these other parts of Mr X’s complaint and my reasons are as follows:
• Sheds and gates in fences are generally permitted development. This means they can be constructed without planning permission. I have seen no evidence to show Mr X complained to the Council’s planning enforcement department. Mr X may complain to the Council’s planning department about these issues, and it can decide whether there is a breach of planning control.
• When we do investigate, we need evidence to show that an alleged fault causes a significant injustice to the individual complainant. I have considered Mr X’s videos and photos and the land outside the neighbour’s garden looks neat and well kept. I cannot see any significant injustice that is caused to Mr X by his neighbour’s access onto the land, the sheds or the flowers planted on the boundary and in planters hanging on the fence.
• Mr X said his neighbour dumps all his rubbish on the land, but the photos and videos he sent me do not support this allegation. The neighbour can be seen to carry the sofa from his garden, through the gap in the fence and into the shed. As I have said above, the land on the estate that can be seen in the photos and videos looks neat and well kept, with no sign of fly-tipping.
• It is possible Mr X has other evidence he has not shown me of fly-tipping on the land. However, this issue was not raised in the complaint to the Council and is not addressed in its response. It was raised with us after Mr X complained to the Council. As a new complaint, Mr X should first report his concerns to the Council’s environmental health officers. After this, if he remained dissatisfied, he should give the Council an opportunity to address this part of his complaint before bringing his complaint back to us.

Back to top

Final decision

19. I ended my investigation as the main part of Mr X’s complaint relates to the matter that we have no power to investigate. I decided not to investigate other parts of Mr X’s complaint because I am unlikely to find fault, or recommend a meaningful remedy for Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman