Other


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Chesterfield Borough Council (17 001 760)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 02-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about damage caused to the complainant's bed during works in a neighbouring flat. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the Ombudsman cannot determine liability for damage.

  • London Borough of Ealing (16 013 858)

    Statement Upheld Other 01-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Council has acknowledged there was some fault in its decision to say Mr X was not a resident landlord. But this did not cause Mr X any injustice.

  • Central Bedfordshire Council (16 015 499)

    Statement Upheld Other 22-May-2017

    Summary: The Council's error in issuing possession proceeding against Mr X rather than Mr Y, and in providing inaccurate information about the court hearing amounts to fault .The Council's failure to respond to Mr X's complaint about the meeting in August 2016 also amounts to fault.

  • London Borough of Lambeth (17 001 265)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 15-May-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to pay rent to the complainant after he let a property to a homeless family. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

  • London Borough of Croydon (17 000 870)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 15-May-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to reinstate a fence. This is because he has no power to investigate a council when it is acting as a landlord.

  • London Borough of Camden (16 012 664)

    Statement Not upheld Other 11-May-2017

    Summary: The complainants say the Council failed to prosecute a property guardian company for not having an HMO licence. The Council decided without fault not to prosecute the company. The Council could possibly have decided this sooner but this did not cause an injustice to the complainants. The Council did take action about disrepair and fire precautions in the building.

  • Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (17 000 498)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 09-May-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about the complainant's eviction in 2015. This is because he has no power to investigate a council when it is acting as a landlord and because some issues have been considered in court. In addition, there were appeal rights the complainant could have used and it is a late complaint.

  • Birmingham City Council (16 011 315)

    Statement Upheld Other 30-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Council was at fault for not responding to Mr and Mrs A's original complaint. However, after they complained to the Chief Executive, it replied within the required timescale and addressed the matters they had raised.

  • London Borough of Hackney (16 014 110)

    Statement Not upheld Other 29-Mar-2017

    Summary: Mr X says the Council is at fault for refusing his request for a disturbance payment following the compulsory purchase of his home. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault by the Council in its handling of this matter and therefore there are no grounds on which he can question the merits of the Council's decision. For this reason the Ombudsman has ended his investigation of this complaint.

  • Chelmsford City Council (16 015 356)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 16-Mar-2017

    Summary: Mr Y complains he lost rental income from Council delay in drawing up a lease to allow his property to be used as temporary accommodation by the homeless. We will not investigate as Mr Y's claimed injustice does not arise directly from any delay by the Council and it seems unlikely we could say the Council could have drawn the lease up any sooner.

;