Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about disrepair in a private rented home. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner about the Council’s actions. We will not investigate a complaint about the suitability of temporary accommodation. It was reasonable for Mr X to challenge the suitability by way of a statutory review and appeal to the courts.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to take sufficient action against his landlord for disrepair in 2023. As a result, he says that he had to leave the accommodation in 2024 because of a notice served on him which he says was retaliatory. He believes action by the Council could have prevented the notice from being effective. He also says the temporary accommodation subsequently offered to him by the Council is unsuitable for his family’s needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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 it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council’s response.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X says the Council failed to take sufficient action against his landlord for disrepair and dampness in the property which he rented. He reported the problems to the Council in January 2023 and the Council subsequently inspected the property and served an improvement notice under the Housing Act 2004.
7. The Council quashed the notice in July when the landlord had carried out the required works in the notice. In January 2024 Mr X again reported dampness problems in a different area to where the work was carried out. The Council gave him advice about mould control and ventilation but it did not inspect until April.
8. In January also the landlord issued a s.21 possession notice to Mr X. he says this was retaliatory because of his reports of disrepair. The Council says the notice was issued because the owner wished to take back the property to prepare it for sale. It does not believe that the delay in carrying out a new inspection had any relevance to the issuing of a possession notice or that it could have prevented this had it inspected sooner.
9. We will not investigate the matters related to disrepair in the property from 2023. These are outside the normal 12-month period for receiving complaints. I have seen no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner. The time for receiving complaints is from when someone became aware of the matter they wish to complain about, not when they complained to the Council or it issued its final response. We would expect someone to complain to us within a year, even if they were dissatisfied with the time the complaints procedure was taking.
10. Mr X reported new disrepair issue in 2024 but at the same time his landlord issued a possession notice. The Council considered this as a homelessness matter and the property was not inspected for disrepair until April. The Council considered that there was a category 2 hazard present but this did not warrant an improvement notice as it was unrelated to the earlier works.
11. The Council had by this time accepted the homelessness relief duty for Mr X and he left the property in April before a possession order was applied for. This ended the relief duty and the Council placed his family in temporary accommodation. I cannot see that there was fault here which would have changed Mr X’s housing situation. The notice served was not a disrepair issue and he was treated as being potentially homeless when he applied.
12. Mr X has complained to the Council about the suitability of the temporary accommodation provided. It is a 3-bedroom house but he says he needs an additional bedroom for a disabled child and provision of disabled parking for his car.
13. Homeless applicants who believe their temporary accommodation is unsuitable have a statutory right to ask for a review under the provisions of s.202 of the Housing Act 1996. It was reasonable for Mr X to request a review and as he is legally represented he could challenge any negative outcome by way of an appeal to the County Court. We will not investigate where it was reasonable to pursue the review /appeal procedure.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about disrepair in a private rented home. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner about the Council’s actions. We will not investigate a complaint about the suitability of temporary accommodation. It was reasonable for Mr X to challenge the suitability by way of a statutory review and appeal to the courts.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman