Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the support the Council gave him when he became homeless. This is because we will not investigate late complaints or investigate when it was reasonable for Mr X to go to court. We cannot investigate where Mr X did go to court and we will not investigate where we could not add to the Council’s investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council:
• failed to take action against his rogue landlord;
• failed to prosecute the landlord for illegally evicting Mr X;
• failed to support him when he became homeless, which led to the loss of all his belongings; and
• racially discriminated against him.
2. Mr X said the Council’s failings affected his mental health, particularly as it was aware Mr X was being harassed by his landlord and did not help him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
6. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)

7. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by the organization. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

Rogue landlord actions prior to February 2023

10. Mr X said he provided information to the Council about his landlord in 2022 and the Council could have prevented his illegal eviction of February 2023 if it had acted sooner. In its complaint response, the Council said it did not have enough information to prosecute the landlord before February 2023.
11. We usually expect people to complain to us within 12 months of the events they are complaining about. Mr X did not complain to us about this until July 2024. I have seen no evidence that Mr X could not have complained earlier. Therefore, I will not investigate this complaint because it is late. In any case, it is unlikely we could achieve a worthwhile outcome if we investigated, given the lapse of time.

Prosecution of landlord from February 2023 to October 2023

12. Here, there is good reason to exercise discretion on time, given the matters complained of include a period falling within 12 months.
13. Mr X was subsequently evicted without the landlord going through the proper process. In its complaint response, the Council accepted it had lost some of the evidence Mr X had provided about this, so it had to ask him to send it again. It said the resulting delay “did not make much difference to the overall situation”. It set out the steps it would take to consider further whether it could prosecute the landlord, including getting evidence from the police.
14. The Council accepts it lost some evidence, for which it has apologised, and it set out the steps it would take to progress the matter in its complaint responses. It is unlikely we could add to the Council’s own investigation. Therefore, we will not consider this part of the complaint further.

Homelessness application from February 2023 to October 2023

15. Here, there is good reason to exercise discretion on time, given the matters complained of include a period falling within 12 months.
16. Mr X approached the Council for help when he was evicted. The Council accepted a relief duty and issued a personalised housing plan (PHP). The Council accepted the housing officer handling his application left and it may not have told Mr X. It also accepted a lack of contact for almost two months and a failure to review the PHP in that period. It apologised and allocated a new housing officer in August 2023. This was appropriate and it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation.
17. It made a decision to end its homelessness duty, which was withdrawn the next day when Mr X asked for a review. It subsequently confirmed Mr X was not in priority need, which meant it did not owe him a main housing duty. This was upheld on review in October 2023. If Mr X disagreed with that decision, he had a right of appeal to the county court on a point of law and it was reasonable for him to exercise that right.

Loss of belongings in February/March 2023

18. Mr X also said he had lost his belongings due to a lack of support from the Council in February/March 2023. Mr X did not complain to us about this until July 2024.
19. I see no reason why Mr X could not have complained to us sooner. I consider the complaint is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion. Further, it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation, particularly given the lapse of time, which makes it more difficult to establish exactly what happened and why. Therefore, we will not investigate this further.

Race discrimination

20. Mr X said the Council discriminated against him on grounds of race. In particular, he said the Council had not pursued his landlord for that reason. Mr X sought a remedy for this through the courts and so it is outside of our jurisdiction. This remains the case even if the court hearing did not then take place. Once Mr X filed a claim in court this was placed outside our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Final decision

21. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we will not investigate late complaints or investigate when it was reasonable for him to go to court. We cannot investigate where Mr X did go to court and we will not investigate where we could not add to the Council’s investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman