The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his reports of disrepair in his privately rented accommodation. The Council was at fault for closing his case too soon and for taking too long to deal with his report initially. The Council also took too long to respond to Mr X’s complaints and to consider if it needed to take further enforcement action against his landlord. This caused Mr X injustice which has been exacerbated by his existing mental health conditions. The Council will apologise and make an enhanced remedy payment to Mr X.
The complaint
Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his reports of disrepair in his privately rented accommodation. Mr X says there have been significant delays in the Council taking action against his landlord. He feels the first Council Officer assigned failed to inspect his property and closed his complaint without discussion. Mr X believes the Council has breached the Equality Act in the way it has handled his disrepair concerns without having due regards to his disabilities. His existing health conditions have been significantly affected by the disrepair and the Council’s inaction.
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 consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (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) We cannot find that an organisation has breached the Equality Act. However, we can find an organisation at fault for failing to take account of its duties under the Equality Act.
How I considered this complaint
I have spoken to Mr X and considered the information he has provided in support of his complaint.
I have considered the information the Council has provided in response to my enquiries.
Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Relevant guidance Private Housing Disrepair Private landlords are responsible for ensuring that rented accommodation is maintained to a certain standard. This includes carrying out repairs and making sure appliances are safe to use.
Private tenants may complain to their council about a failure by the landlord to keep the property in good repair. Councils have powers under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (introduced by the Housing Act 2004, Part 1) to take enforcement action against private landlords where the council has identified a hazard which puts the health and safety of the tenant at risk. When a council has reason to believe there is serious risk to the health and safety of an occupier it must inspect the property.
The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) is a tool used to help councils identify and protect against potential risks and hazards to health and safety.
The HHSRS assesses 29 categories of housing hazard. Each hazard has a weighting system which will help determine whether the property is rated as having category one (serious) or category two (other) hazards.
If the assessment finds a category one hazard, councils have a duty to serve a notice to the landlord to address the hazard. If the assessment finds a category two hazard, councils have discretion about whether to take formal action.
The Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 came into force on 20 March 2019. This amended the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to require that both social and privately rented properties meet certain standards, both at the beginning and throughout a tenancy. The government has issued guidance for councils on how the Act affects them. The Act requires a higher standard of property condition than under the previous version of the Act (‘fit for habitation’ rather than just ‘in repair’). If these standards are not met tenants have the right to bring a claim against their landlord for breach of contract.
Council’s complaint procedure The Council aims to acknowledge all complaints in three working days and to respond to stage one complaints in 15 working days and stage two complaints in 25 working days.
What happened Disrepair issues This chronology provides an overview of key events in this case and does not detail everything that happened.
Mr X first reported disrepair issues with his privately rented accommodation to the Council at the end of June 2021. The Council requested further information from Mr X two weeks later when he cased it for an update.
In early August 2021, Mr X provided the Council with copies of his emails with his landlord’s managing agent and photographs showing the disrepair. These showed Mr X had been in contact with the managing agent about some of the disrepair issues since 2016. The Council Officer allocated to Mr X’s case contacted the managing agent about these issues.
In early October 2021, the Council Officer emailed Mr X to explain the managing agent had committed to completing work to resolve the disrepair issues. The Officer said they would be closing the case as a result.
On 8 December 2021, a local councillor acting on Mr X’s behalf emailed the Council to question why it had closed his disrepair complaint. Mr X contacted the Council again on 30 December 2021 to ask for a review of his disrepair case and for it to be reassigned to another Officer. Mr X also asked the Council to escalate his complaint to stage two.
On 10 January 2022, Mr X asked the Council to escalate his complaint to stage two again because he had not received a response to his councillor’s complaint made on his behalf in early December 2021.
The Council sent Mr X a stage one complaint response on 13 January 2022. The Council upheld Mr X’s complaints about delay and the decision to close his disrepair case. The Council apologised to Mr X and accepted it should have inspected his property before making the closure decision as it was likely a formal notice needed to be served on the managing agent (and landlord) to ensure the repair works were completed. The Council also apologised to Mr X for the six-day delay in responding to his complaint. The Council confirmed it had reopened Mr X’s case and assigned it to another Officer who would be in contact to arrange a time to inspect the property and take appropriate action.
The newly assigned Officer completed an inspection of Mr X’s property on 28 January 2022. They issued an abatement notice to the landlord on 31 January 2022 to deal with the suspected asbestos in the kitchen flooring within 14 days. The landlord’s managing agent obtained an asbestos survey a few days later which confirmed the flooring could be sealed to contain the risk.
On 14 February 2022, the Council Officer issued a notice under section 4 of the Prevention of Damage by Pests Act and an improvement notice to Mr X’s landlord and managing agent which set out the repair works they needed to complete on Mr X’s property by 15 April 2022. This included works to remove mice from the property and repairs to the bathroom, kitchen and windows to address the category one and two hazards identified. The Council received notification from the landlord that the asbestos flooring had been safely contained in Mr X’s property on 17 February 2022, which complied with the abatement notice issued at the end of January 2022.
Between mid-February and early April 2022, the Council Officer has regular contact with the managing agent about the progress of repair works on Mr X’s property. On 5 April 2022, the managing agent asks the Council for more time to comply with the improvement and section 4 notices as the repairs will not be completed by 15 April 2022. The Council agrees to an extension to the improvement notice which allows the landlord and managing agent until 15 June 2022 to complete the outstanding works on Mr X’s property.
Since then, the Council Officer and the managing agent have continued to have regular contact. The Officer explained to Mr X that prosecuting his landlord for the outstanding disrepair issues would not help progress ongoing works any quicker. As at the point of our enquiries in mid-August 2022, the landlord and managing agent had yet to complete all the repairs on Mr X’s property.
In response to my draft decision statement, the Council and Mr X have confirmed that all works detailed in improvement notices to the landlord were completed in September 2022.
Mr X’s complaints Mr X’s local councillor wrote to the Council on 8 December 2021 to raise concerns about its decision to close the disrepair complaint against his landlord. Mr X followed this contact up with the Council on 30 December 2021, when he first asked the Council to escalate his concerns to a stage two complaint. Mr X contacted the Council again on 10 January 2022 to ask for escalation of his complaint to stage two because he had still not received the Council’s stage one complaint response.
On 13 January 2022, the Council sent its stage one complaint response to Mr X. It apologised for the delay in responding to his disrepair report and stage one complaint, not inspecting his property or taking formal action against his landlord. The Council agreed to reopen and reallocate Mr X’s case to another Officer, who would be in touch to arrange an inspection visit.
Mr X received the Council’s stage two complaint response on 17 February 2022. The Council considered Mr X’s further complaints about delay and the first Officer’s handling and closure of the disrepair complaint. Mr X alleged the Officer had breached the Equality Act as they had not taken account of Mr X’s disabilities.
The Council confirmed it agreed with the finding made at stage one to uphold Mr X’s complaint about delay in progressing his disrepair complaint. The Council did not find that any of its earlier failures in handling had been caused by a breach of the Equality Act. The Council did however accept that its poor handling had a greater impact on Mr X because of his disabilities. The Council offered Mr X a payment of £330 as an apology for the delay experienced and the time and trouble Mr X had had to go to in progressing his disrepair complaints. The Council explained this payment amount was in line with its compensation policy.
Mr X brought his complaint to us in March 2022 as he remained dissatisfied with the Council’s handling.
Analysis The Council should not have closed Mr X’s disrepair complaint without discussion or inspection of his property. The Council has acknowledged this fault and sought to remedy the injustice caused to Mr X by reopening and reallocating his case to another Officer.
The evidence the Council has provided shows the new Officer acted quickly to inspect the property and then serve formal notices on Mr X’s landlord to undertake the repairs needed to address the category one and two hazards identified. The Officer’s decision to allow the landlord more time to complete the repairs to Mr X’s property was one they were entitled to make given their professional judgement of the circumstances at the time and the Council’s enforcement procedures.
I am however concerned that despite the Officer’s continued engagement with the landlord’s managing agent, the outstanding works had yet to be completed by the extended deadline of 15 June 2022 or by the point of my enquiries in late August 2022. Mr X continued to live in a property with category one and two hazards until September 2022, which was unacceptable.
While I commend the Officer for their continuous engagement with the landlord’s managing agent, their contact with Mr X was limited to occasional updates on the progress of their action and contact with the agent. This appears to have left Mr X feeling his concerns were not being adequately addressed or taken seriously by the Council. Mr X’s existing mental health conditions has meant the lack of Council updates and delay in completing the repairs have had a greater impact on his wellbeing, which I consider the Council should now seek to remedy. I have not however seen evidence to suggest the Council’s handling of Mr X’s case was flawed due to it having disregarded his rights under the Equality Act.
The Council took longer than its published policy to respond to Mr X’s stage one and two complaints. This was fault that no doubt added to Mr X’s feelings of frustration that the Council was not taking his concerns seriously.
I commend the Council’s apology and offer of £330 to Mr X in recognition of the injustice he has experienced. These remedies do not however address the continued injustice Mr X experienced since his disrepair complaint was reallocated. I have therefore recommended an enhanced remedy below.
Agreed action
Within one month of my final decision, the Council will: apologise to Mr X for the injustice caused by the faults identified in this statement; and, make a payment of £700 in recognition of the delay, time, trouble and distress Mr X has experienced. This includes the Council’s previous offer of £330 if this has not been paid to Mr X already.
The Council should provide us with evidence to show it has completed the above actions.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation and found fault with the Council. This fault has caused Mr X injustice and the Council has agreed to take further action to remedy this.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman