Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s actions in relation to a boundary dispute. This is because the matter relates to the Council’s provision and ownership of social housing.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s actions in relation to a boundary dispute between him and his neighbour. He says the Council failed to respond to his initial correspondence, misled and wrongly advised him and has taken formal advice which resulted in him losing part of the land he believed was his. He is also unhappy with the Council’s handling of his complaint about the matter.

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. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Boundary disputes are generally private civil matters between the owners of the properties concerned. The true position of a boundary between two properties is a legal issue and there is a right to apply to the Land Registry to determine it.
6. The Council owned the property next to Mr X’s, which was at the time social housing. As such, its involvement in the case stems from the provision and management of social housing and Mr X's complaint about its actions therefore fall outside our jurisdiction as set out at Paragraph 3.
7. However, even if the complaint was within our jurisdiction we could not reach any meaningful view on it. This is because we cannot say where the boundary is between the two properties to decide if the Council misled or wrongly advised Mr X. Also, because there are no detailed records of what the Council’s housing officers told Mr X during their visits, and because their accounts of these conversations differ from Mr X's, we could not reach any meaningful decision on what the officers told Mr X.
8. Mr X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We cannot investigate this complaint. This is because it concerns the actions of council officers in connection with the management of social housing. It therefore falls outside our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman