The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr X complained the Council’s children’s services gave misleading information to it about a prospective tenant. Mr X says the tenant has damaged the property, failed to pay rent and harassed both staff and other tenants. We do not find fault with the Council.
The complaint
Mr X complained the Council’s children’s services gave misleading information to it about a prospective tenant so Mr X would provide accommodation for this tenant. Mr X says the tenant threatened and harassed staff and neighbours and has damaged the property.
Mr X also complained the tenant has not paid rent for most of the months he has lived in the property.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) We cannot question whether an organisation’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended) 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)
How I considered this complaint
I have considered all the information Mr X provided. I have also asked the Council questions and requested information, and in turn have considered the Council’s response.
Mr X and the Council had opportunity to comment on my draft decision before I made my final decision.
What I found
The Council’s children’s services are called Brighter Futures. Throughout this decision I will refer to all members of staff for the Council’s children’s services as “Brighter Futures” unless it is relevant to specify.
Mr X is the landlord for various properties and employs members of staff to act for him in letting out these properties. I will refer to all representatives of Mr X as “Mr X” in this decision statement unless it is relevant to specify.
What happened Brighter Futures provided a tenancy to someone, who I will call Mr A, before he entered prison. Before Mr A left prison, he was referred to Brighter Futures for help in getting a tenancy. Mr A was released from prison on 11 August 2021.
Mr A viewed a property owned by Mr X accompanied by Brighter Futures on 16 August 2021. Brighter Futures contacted Mr X on 20 August 2021 to advise Mr A would like to accept the property. Mr X told Brighter Futures this property was not available any more and asked about Mr A’s employment status.
Brighter Futures told Mr X that Mr A was unemployed and enquired about any available properties. Mr X discussed a different property with Brighter Futures and sent a video of the property to Brighter Futures on 24 August 2021.
Brighter Futures told Mr X that Mr A wished to agree a tenancy for this property and provided Mr A’s identification to Mr X.
On 26 August 2021, Mr X provided a draft copy of the tenancy agreement to Brighter Futures. Brighter Futures told Mr X that Mr A was signing the tenancy as a single entity and he had no guarantor but Brighter Futures could provide any other information Mr X needed.
Mr A signed the tenancy agreement on 3 September 2021. A member of Mr X’s staff was present during signing of the tenancy agreement.
On 10 September 2021, Mr A moved into the property.
Mr X sent a complaint to Brighter Futures on 11 September 2021 about Mr A’s behaviour. Brighter Futures spoke with Mr A who apologised for his behaviour and said he had spoken with Mr X. Brighter Futures confirmed with Mr X the matter had been resolved.
On 15 September 2021, Mr X reported further issues about Mr A to Brighter Futures. Mr X asked Brighter Futures to remove Mr A from the property. Brighter Futures discussed the matter with Mr X and advised they could not remove Mr A from his tenancy.
Mr X made a formal complaint to Brighter Futures on 4 October 2021. Mr X said they require “quiet” tenants with no criminal records. Mr X said Brighter Futures had lied and provided a false reference about Mr A. Mr X also issued a formal eviction notice giving Mr A two weeks to leave the property.
Brighter Futures responded to Mr X’s complaint on 25 October 2021. Brighter Futures said: It accepted that a member of staff told Mr X that Mr A was “a nice young person”. It apologised if this lead to a mistaken impression of Mr A and said it had already taken disciplinary action against the member of staff.
Mr X did not tell it about its criteria for tenants and Mr X did not ask any questions about Mr A’s criminal history.
It would continue to look for new housing for Mr A but could not force him to leave the property.
Mr X sought consideration of his complaint at Stage 2 of the complaints process. Mr X also reported damage to the property by Mr A on 29 October 2021 and advised he would take the costs for repairs from the deposit.
Mr X continued to liaise with Brighter Futures about Mr A’s tenancy. Brighter Futures told Mr X that Mr A would not sign the deed of surrender and only Mr X has a legal right to evict Mr A. Mr X told Brighter Futures he would look to get possession of the flat through the courts.
On 3 December 2021, Brighter Futures issued a Stage 2 complaint response. Brighter Futures said: It could not remove Mr A from the flat and only Mr X had a legal right to do so.
It had tried to convince Mr A to surrender the flat but he has refused.
It had no financial obligation to pay for Mr A’s rent or any damage he caused as Mr A signed the tenancy as a sole entity.
Payment for rent is between Mr X and Mr A and Mr X needs to follow this up with Mr A.
Mr X should report any antisocial or criminal behaviour, including damage to the flat, to the police.
Mr X evicted Mr A from the flat on 1 April 2022.
Mr X contacted Brighter Futures on 22 April 2022 seeking payment of £3,247 for outstanding rent and damage to the property after deduction of the deposit. Brighter Futures responded to advise that Mr A was responsible for this debt and not the Council.
Analysis Misleading information Mr X complained the Council’s children’s services gave misleading information to it about a prospective tenant so Mr X would provide accommodation for this tenant.
The Council has accepted in its Stage 1 complaint response that a member of staff told Mr X that Mr A was “a nice young person”. The Council apologised to Mr X and told both he and the Ombudsman that it has taken disciplinary action against the member of staff. The Council clarified that this disciplinary action was informal in the manner of training to learn about suitable language to use when describing prospective tenants.
The Council has accepted the fault in the language used to describe Mr A, apologised and provided training to its member of staff. I consider the Council has taken appropriate action to reflect this fault.
While Brighter Futures described Mr A as “a nice young person” it did not provide any references to Mr X nor any status as a guarantor or provide any misleading information outside this statement. Mr X had opportunity to request a criminal history or references for Mr A but chose not to do so. Mr X also had opportunity to tell Brighter Futures of its criteria for tenants but also chose not to do so. I cannot find fault with the Council that Mr X did not complete any background checks of Mr A before accepting him as a tenant.
The statement that Mr A was “a nice young person” is not sufficient to state that Brighter Futures mislead Mr X or a sign of significant enough fault to justify more than an apology.
Rent and damages Mr X also complained the tenant has not paid rent for most of the months he has lived in the property and caused damage to the property.
Mr X agreed a tenancy agreement directly with Mr A. The Council is not a party to the tenancy agreement and did not sign as a guarantor to the tenancy agreement.
It was Mr A’s responsibility to pay for any rent while he lived at the property and Mr A’s responsibility to cover the cost of damage he caused to the property.
Mr X has already kept the full deposit funds to partially cover the damages caused to the property. Mr X needs to seek repayment of further damages and outstanding rent directly from Mr A as he is the sole party responsible for rent arrears and damages.
Since the Council is not subject to this contract agreement, I cannot find fault with its or hold it responsible for the money Mr X’s is seeking.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation as there was no significant fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman