The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to issue a notice advising Ms X it was considering serving an Improvement Notice in connection with the property she rents out to tenants. This is because Ms X can appeal against an Improvement Notice to the First Tier Tribunal and this places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.
The complaint
The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, says the Council should look at the facts of her case and its decision to issue the notice advising it was considering serving her with an Improvement Notice because it was issued incorrectly. She also complains about the behaviour of the officer who visited and inspected the property.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended) We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms X owns a property which she rents out to tenants. Following contact from the tenants about disrepair issues, a Council officer visited the property to inspect it. Ms X was present during the inspection, along with the tenant, and she was subsequently issued with a notice which advised her of work which needed to be completed at the property to avoid the issuing of a formal Improvement Notice.
Ms X complained to the Council about the behaviour of the officer during the visit and the way she was spoken to. In responding to her complaint, the Council acknowledged the officer can sometimes appear direct and may have raised his voice to her. It apologised for the officer’s abrupt approach and confirmed he had been spoken to about how to conduct conversations.
Ms X had the opportunity to give her views on the required work as set out in the notice. If an Improvement Notice is issued, the person to whom it is issued has a right to appeal to the First Tier Tribunal. As Ms X would have this right available to her, and we would reasonably expect her to make use of it, the matter falls outside our jurisdiction and will not be pursued.
While I note the Council has acknowledged and apologised for the behaviour of the officer, an investigation of this matter would be unlikely to add significantly to that already undertaken by the Council or lead to a different outcome and it will not be pursued.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because she can appeal against an Improvement Notice to the First Tier Tribunal and this places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman