Summary: There was no fault by the Council when it advised Mrs B that she needed to apply to regularise the lack of Buildings Regulations approval, and pay an application fee.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complains that the Council mishandled her request for a Building Regulations approval for her wood burner. The Council first told Mrs B that she would need to apply to the Council and pay a fee, and then told her she would need to certification from an engineer at further expense.
2. Mrs B says the Council should not have charged her as it was the engineer that certified the work. This put her to unnecessary expense and time and trouble.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information provided by Mrs B. I considered the information provided by the Council including its file documents. I also considered the law and guidance set out below. Both parties had the opportunity to comment on a draft of this statement. I have taken account of any comments received before issuing a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and government guidance

6. Most building work, whether new, alterations, or extensions requires Building Regulation approval. A person can get approval from the Council, from a registered building control approver or ‘competent person’ relevant to the work. This includes a certified heating engineer.
7. The Regulations set standards for the design and construction of buildings and also ensure the health and safety of people in and about those buildings.  'Approved documents' give examples of how the Regulations can be met, but these examples do not have to be followed.
8. Compliance with Regulations can be certified after the work is done, but only by a Council Building Control service. An application for this is called a regularisation application.
9. The Council’s website says that charges are not payable to it for work which solely involves that undertaken by a member of the Competent Persons Scheme. This includes a registered engineer installing a wood burner.

What happened

10. Mrs B has a wood burner, but eight years after its installation she found she did not have Building Regulation approval. Mrs B contacted the Council. It tried to help her trace who had done the work but Mrs B had no details. The Council advised Mrs B she would need to apply for regularisation. The Council’s inspector visited Mrs B’s property but said that he could not approve the work until Mrs B had submitted technical information so the Council could make sure the work complied with the Approved document.
11. Mrs B contacted the Council again and it sent her a list of questions and the details she would need to submit. The Council had asked Mrs B to provide details of the wood burner, the dimensions of its hearth and flue, ventilation details, its proximity to combustible materials and the floor, as well as other details. Mrs B could not answer all the questions and so she employed a registered engineer. The engineer could not certify someone else’s work, but uninstalled and reinstalled the wood burner, and notified the Council.
12. Mrs B complained to the Council that it had not given her the correct information when she first contacted it. She feels the Council should have advised her to have an engineer uninstall and reinstall the wood burner, and then the engineer could approve building regulations. Mrs B feels the fee she paid the Council was unnecessary when the certification was actually done by the engineer.
13. The Council responded. It said it was correct to advise Mrs B that she needed Building Regulations approval. Her failure to have approval in place meant the work was illegal and she would need to apply to the Council to regularise it. This would involve either getting an engineer to inspect the wood burner, remove it completely, or provide the Council with the information needed for it to check the installation. The Council confirmed that as Mrs B had chosen to get the work inspected by the engineer, it would close the application once it had the engineer’s certificate. It said it could not refund the fee as it had given Mrs B the correct advice and she had chosen to instruct the engineer. It did however offer to make a goodwill payment of £133.
14. Mrs B told the Council she did not agree the Council had given her the correct advice. Had the Council told her that she could use the engineer, she would have done so and not have needed to apply to the Council to regularise the situation thereby incurring a further fee. Mrs B again requested a full refund.
15. The Council responded further. It said that Mrs B’s concern had been that she would not get a completion certificate. The only option was to apply to regularise the illegal works. Without the regularisation application, the Council would have taken enforcement action for the illegal installation. The Approved document would have to be followed either by an engineer or the Council. The Council said that it did at the outset suggest that Mrs B contact an engineer and she may have to have the wood burner uninstalled and reinstalled (because the engineer would not usually sign off another engineer’s work). The Council also sent Mrs B the requirements which she could have completed and sent back to the Council without employing an engineer. The Council also reminded Mrs B that it was her responsibility to make sure she had Building Regulation approval when she had the wood burner installed.
16. Mrs B complained to the Council again. She asked why the regularisation application was the only option when she could have had the works rectified and certified by an engineer without applying to the Council. The Council said that she could have provided information to it, but the Approved document had to be signed off by an engineer.
17. The Council maintained that it was correct to advise her that illegal works would require a regularisation application. It confirmed that even when the engineer had signed off that the Approved document had been followed, Mrs B would still need to make the regularisation application.
18. In response to our enquiries, the Council has confirmed that as the work did not have Building Regulation approval it was unlawful and so it could not be certified by the engineer alone. The regularisation application required Mrs B to give information that would show that the wood burner followed the Approved document.
19. The Council agreed that it would not charge a fee where work is certified by a registered engineer. However, the fee here was payable for the regularisation certificate. The Council has explained that it has to recover the costs involved with the regularisation process regardless of whether it issues a certificate or not. In this case, it acknowledged that Mrs B was unhappy with the service. It calculated the cost of the work it had done on the application and was able to offer Mrs B a partial refund.

Analysis

20. There was no fault by the Council. It has explained that as the work did not have building regulations approval, Mrs B had to apply to regularise this. It did not wrongly advise Mrs B. The Council is required to charge a fee for this to recover its costs. Mrs B needed a heating engineer to complete the process, and I can see that as the engineer has uninstalled and reinstalled the burner, it might follow that Mrs B did not have to apply for regularisation and pay a fee. But the Council is clear that although the engineer gave information to assist the process, their work and certification could not be done in place of the Council’s regularisation process.
21. The Council has offered a partial refund and there is no basis for me to recommend that it take further action.

Back to top

Final decision

22. I have completed my investigation. There is no fault by the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman