Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s lack of action and communication when he reported his landlord failed to address disrepair, mould and damp issues at his privately rented property. We found the Council at fault for letting the case drift, not properly considering Mr X’s concerns and failing to record or explain its decisions to Mr X at the time. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council's actions after reporting disrepair issues at his privately rented property. He says the Council did not provide support and delayed visiting when his landlord failed to act to carry out remedial works. His landlord has since started eviction proceedings against his family. This has caused significant distress and frustration, and Mr X says his family has had to continue living in hazardous conditions to their health.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

4. I am considering matters up until September 2023, when Mr X complained to us about the Council’s lack of action up to that point. Further matters after this are outside the scope of my investigation. I have added Paragraphs 27 and 28 for brief context on further events since but I am not taking a view on them. We are entitled to determine an appropriate cut off point for our investigations.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I discussed the complaint with Mr X and considered his views.
6. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its written responses and information it provided.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and administrative background

Private housing disrepair

8. Private tenants may complain to their council about a landlord’s failure to keep their property in good repair. Councils have powers under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) introduced by the Housing Act 2004 to assess the condition of residential housing and take enforcement action where appropriate.
9. The HHSRS looks at the risks to the health and safety of occupants or visitors to a particular property. The HHSRS calls these risks hazards. There are Category 1 and Category 2 hazards. Category 1 hazards are the most serious.
10. If a council serves either an improvement notice or a notice of emergency remedial action, a landlord cannot give a Section 21 (no fault) eviction notice to that tenant for six months.

The Council’s website and Private Housing enforcement policy

11. The Council’s website says tenants can report a landlord if they are not carrying out their responsibilities such as not doing essential repairs. If a landlord does not respond or does not arrange for suitable repairs, a tenant can contact the Council for advice. The Council would contact the landlord and ensure if the repairs are important, they would be carried out in a reasonable time.
12. Relevant to this complaint, the Council’s Housing Enforcement Policy says:
• “unless there is an imminent risk to the health and safety of the occupant or visitors to the property, the council will attempt to secure the required improvements informally, and within a reasonable amount of time that will be determined by the case officer”.
• “Following the receipt of a service request or complaint about poor housing conditions or landlord, an initial risk assessment will normally be carried out. Any follow up advice or action will depend on the outcome of the initial assessment, which may not always involve a visit to the property. The council will take further action to deal with health and safety concerns or issues which cause a statutory nuisance. For less serious issues, such as delays to other repairs we will provide support to advise tenants of their rights and practical steps they may wish to follow”.

Background

13. Mr X lives in private rented accommodation with his family, where they have been tenants for over a decade.

What happened – a summary of key relevant events

14. On 9 March 2023, Mr X raised concerns with his landlord about the disrepair in the property, including about damp and mould. On 4 May, his landlord visited the property.
15. On 9 May, Mr X contacted the Council’s Private Sector Housing (“PSH”) team. He said he reported issues two months previously to the landlord who had still not done any repair works. After this, PSH Officer 1 contacted the landlord. The landlord responded he had visited and spoken to Mr X. He attached a copy of a letter he sent to Mr X with a plan of works, including installing a Positive Input Ventilation (“PIV” system) and advice about keeping the house ventilated. PSH Officer 1 acknowledged this.
16. On 23 May, PSH Officer 1 shared the landlord’s letter with Mr X. Mr X responded to the Council on the same day. He said the landlord said to him the cost of repairs would be too high. Mr X outlined the nature of the issues in the property and the landlord’s delays. He asked the Council to inspect for an impartial view and support as he had concerns he could be evicted for complaining. He sent a timeline of actions by his landlord about the disrepair, along with a photo of some work carried out which he was dissatisfied with.
17. On 24 June, Mr X chased a response from the Council. He shared a further letter from the landlord with proposed actions. He said these not been actioned properly, there were continual delays, with some issues overlooked. There had been no treatment for the damp and mould, affecting his family’s health and possessions. He asked the Council for a response, a copy of its policies, and next steps.
18. Two days later, PSH Officer 2 rang Mr X explaining PSH Officer 1 had left, and a new officer would arrange to visit in due course. The Council said Mr X agreed to wait for a new officer.
19. On 10 July, Mr X emailed the landlord, copying in PSH Officer 2. He repeated further concerns about the mould and some of the work done. He asked the landlord for an updated plan of action and clarification on some points.
20. On 3 August, Mr X formally complained to the Council for its delays in dealing with his case, failing to visit his home and lack of communication. His landlord had now issued him a Section 21 eviction notice and he said it could have been prevented had the Council taken action sooner.
21. On 16 August, PSH Officer 2 was allocated to Mr X’s case.
22. On 21 August, the Council responded to Mr X’s complaint at Stage One. It said:
• it took an informal approach as it had contacted the landlord about the works, and it noted Mr X had been in contact with the landlord about the progress too.
• It would contact him to arrange an initial inspection visit.
• on reflection, it could have set timelines for the landlord to complete the remedial works when Mr X first raised his concerns to the Council. It may not have prevented the landlord issuing an eviction notice, but the works may have been done in a shorter time period. The Council offered £25 as an acknowledgement of the service he received.
23. Mr X escalated his complaint. He did not accept the £25. He did not feel the Council was taking his housing situation seriously enough.
24. On 1 September, PSH Officer 2 inspected the house. He issued a schedule of works for the landlord to complete by late October to bring it up to an acceptable standard.
25. On 18 September, the Council responded to Mr X’s complaint at Stage Two. It said it would do another visit after the deadline in October and it may take further action against the landlord if necessary. It partially upheld his complaint.
26. At the end of September, Mr X complained to us about the delays by the Council up to this point.

Events since Mr X’s complaint to us

27. In November, PSH Officer 2 conducted another visit. The Council issued an Improvement Notice to Mr X’s landlord, requiring work to be completed by February 2024. PSH Officer 2 identified one Category 1 hazard and some Category 2 hazards.
28. In mid-December, Mr X’s landlord appealed against the Improvement Notice. The Council informed Mr X it could not enforce the notice until the conclusion of the appeal.

The Council’s response to my enquiries

29. The Council said although it acknowledged Mr X reported damp and mould at the property, it decided to take an informal approach as the landlord and tenant were liaising with each other about the works between May and July 2023. It said no intervention was needed as the landlord was fulfilling his duties at the time. It was satisfied the PIV system would address the issues raised. It considered a visit was not necessary.

Analysis

Decision making

30. The Council says it decided to take an informal approach in the first instance and it is entitled to do so. The Council’s reasoning is it understood it as both parties working towards a resolution. However, it appears to solely rely on seeing communication between and from Mr X and the landlord about the proposed remedial works. The Council has not provided evidence of any contemporaneous records or rationale of its decision making at the time, including if or how it made an initial assessment. I cannot see if it considered the timeline evidence or the photos Mr X shared. The Council has not demonstrated it took into account all relevant evidence and therefore it brings into question if it made a properly considered decision at the time. This is fault.
31. From what I’ve seen, Mr X gave updates to Council to show his continual dissatisfaction with the landlord’s progress with any works, with the expectation the Council would consider and act on it. But I cannot see the Council engaged or specifically acknowledged the nature of Mr X’s concerns. This is fault. He clearly said they were not being done or would not solve the problem in his view.

Communication and delay

32. Importantly, I cannot see the Council explained to Mr X of any approach it intended to take and what this meant for him, or even respond to his substantive concerns. The Ombudsman’s Principles of Good Administrative practice outlines the need for councils to be open, accountable, and transparent, and setting expectations for service users through communication. The Council did not in this case. This is fault. The failure to communicate this with Mr X caused him avoidable uncertainty about his case and frustration.
33. It is not my role to make a judgement on whether work was sufficient or suitable. Even with an initial informal approach, I would have expected the Council to have followed up with Mr X or the landlord as to any progress made and consider if it needed evidence of these. As it was a point of dispute, this would have given the Council the opportunity to satisfy itself on whether any issues remained. It could then consider if enforcement action may be necessary.
34. The Council made some initial enquiries with the landlord at the end of May 2023. I cannot see any substantive contact with either the landlord or Mr X about his case, until Mr X chased the Council a month later. This prompted PSH Officer 2 to make contact. There was some delay as it was not until Mr X formally complained in August 2023, that it allocated a new officer to his case and to arrange a visit. The Council let the case drift. This is fault.
35. The Council accepted it should have set timescales for the landlord to complete the works and by doing so, it may have encouraged him to do it sooner. I agree. This is stated on its website and policy (see Paragraphs 11 and 12). It did not act in line with this. This is fault. The Council offered a remedy of £25. This is not in line with our published Guidance on Remedies, and I do not consider it appropriate to address Mr X’s injustice.

Injustice

36. The injustice as a result of the above faults identified was uncertainty and frustration to Mr X. The Council failed to properly consider his concerns when it made its decisions or communicate with him about them. There was initial delay of progress between May and September 2023. I recognise Mr X’s view had the Council acted sooner, it would have prevented the landlord from issuing an eviction notice. On balance, had it not been for these faults, I cannot say what is likely to have happened earlier. This is because, in my view, any action the Council may have taken would be reliant on the actions of the landlord (a third party) based on the circumstances and situation at the time. However, this creates a level of uncertainty for what the outcome could have been and if repairs could have been done sooner and made a difference to Mr X’s current living situation. This uncertainty is significant injustice.
37. I note it appears the Council has now been taking action since it visited Mr X in September 2023. If Mr X is dissatisfied with the Council’s actions since this point, these are new matters outside the scope of this investigation (see Paragraph 4). This would need to be a new complaint direct to the Council for it to consider through its complaints process first.

Back to top

Agreed action

38. To remedy the injustice set out above, the Council has agreed to carry out the following actions:
39. Within one month of the final decision:
• Apologise to Mr X and pay him £200 as a symbolic payment to recognise his uncertainty and frustration caused by the faults identified above between May and September 2023.
40. Within two months of the final decision:
• Share the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Good Administrative Practice with Private Sector Housing Officers and send written reminders to relevant staff to:
1. to clearly record decisions about what action it intends to take with private housing disrepair issues, explaining what it has considered and the reasons for this;
2. to ensure these decisions are communicated with the complainant; and
3. to set a time period for repairs works to be carried out if it takes an informal approach. So when this passes, it can then consider whether further action is necessary.
41. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

42. I found fault with the Council which caused injustice to Mr X. The Council has agreed with my recommendations to remedy this, and I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman