The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to email the complainant with a penalty fine. This is because we are unlikely to find sufficient evidence of fault.
The complaint
In short, Mr X says the Council acted unfairly by posting a letter to his previous address and not emailing him. Mr X says he was unaware that he had been fined £5000.
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 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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X says he was fined for not responding to a letter seeking information on whether his rented property was operating as a House of Multiple Occupation (HMO). He says it wasn’t, but the Council imposed a fine.
The Council says it carried out a search via the Land Registry which showed the same address the letter was sent to. And that ultimately it was a condition of Mr X’s landlord licence that he directly inform the licensing team of his change of address. And he did not do this.
As a service improvement the Council said it would send documents via email too in future.
We will not investigate. This is because the letter appears to have been correctly issued in line with licence terms and conditions and we are unlikely to find sufficient evidence of fault to justify investigating.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman