The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage to property during a deep clean of the complainant’s home. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. Complaints involving damage to property are best dealt with by insurers and the courts.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complained the Council stacked his collection of vinyl records vertically instead of horizontally during a deep clean of his home. Mr X also said council staff leant against the records. Mr X said the Council’s actions caused damage and worry. Mr X wants the Council to pay compensation.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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) 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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
In response to Mr X’s complaints the Council said it had spoken to its officers. They recalled that some records were already stacked horizontally. Its staff had done their best to tidy Mr X’s home. Mr X’s social care co-ordinator confirmed there had been some more recent movement of items when a boiler was repaired. The Council could not say if this had led to the records being moved. It denied responsibility for the damage.
I understand how important the issue at the heart of Mr X’s complaint is. But we will not start an investigation into his complaint.
Firstly, it is unlikely we could add anything to the Council’s response. We could never reach a safe conclusion about whether the records were moved by council officers.
But more importantly, the role of the Ombudsman is to consider complaints about administrative fault. The issue at the heart of Mr X’s complaint is if the Council was negligent which caused damage to his property. We cannot establish liability in complaints involving negligence and damage to property. These are issues for the Council’s insurers and, ultimately, for the courts.
If Mr X wants to pursue compensation for the damage to his records, he will need to make a claim against the Council’s insurance. If the Council’s insurers rejected a formal claim from Mr X, he could make a claim in court. I consider it would be reasonable for him to do so. The process is simple and not expensive. Also, only the Court can decide if the Council is responsible for the damage to Mr X’s records. The Court could decide the question of negligence and what damages, if any, the Council should pay. These are not decisions the Ombudsman can take and so an investigation is not appropriate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable for Mr X to pursue his claim for damages through the Council’s insurers and the courts.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman