Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has not proved it carried out work to the complainant’s house in 2012. This is because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council cannot prove it removed asbestos from his house in 2012. He says the Council will not now lease the house because there is a warning on the file about asbestos. Mr X wants the Council to reimburse him or prove the work was done.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I considered comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

4. Mr X leased a house to the Council in 2011. The Council terminated the agreement early in 2012. The Council found asbestos in the property. Mr X paid £920 for the asbestos to be removed. Mr X says he paid up-front before the work was done. He also says the Council told him it would post him a receipt but it never did.
5. In 2020 Mr X tried to lease the house to the Council. Mr X says he was told the Council will not lease it because the file says there is an issue with asbestos. He asked the Council to prove the asbestos was removed or, if that is not possible, to reimburse him for the work.
6. The Council confirmed it has a record of Mr X paying £920 in May 2012. It explained that under its data retention policy, records relating to repairs completed in 2012 would have been deleted in 2018. It said that although it knows Mr X paid £920 in 2012 it cannot provide any other records because they have all been deleted. The Council made a mistake in one complaint reply and said Mr X had made the payment in 2018; this was an error and the Council has confirmed the records show he paid the money in 2012.
7. The Council also explained that it no longer has a leasing scheme so Mr X cannot re-join that scheme. But, Mr X has rented the house to a tenant, since 2020, through a different Council scheme. The Council says this shows there are no marks against his property stating it is dangerous.

Assessment

8. I will not start an investigation because the time that has passed, and the absence of records, mean it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response. The Council has no records from 2012, apart from the proof of payment, so it would be impossible to demonstrate whether the work was done. Mr X, however, could have followed this up in 2012 when he did not get a receipt as promised. And, as Mr X says he paid in advance, he could have taken steps in 2012 to check the asbestos was removed.
9. In addition, in 2020, the Council arranged for the house to be rented to a tenant under a different scheme. It seems unlikely the Council would have done this if it thought the property was unsafe due to asbestos. The Council has written a brief statement for Mr X confirming it holds no file notes about Mr X’s property.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I will not start an investigation because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman