The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council contacting Mrs X about her rental property after it received information it was a house in multiple occupation as there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X seeks.
The complaint
Mrs X complained she was contacted by the Council about her rental property after it had received information it was a house in multiple occupation (HMO). Mrs X complained the Council’s suggestion it would visit the property infringed on her and her tenant’s privacy and that it would not disclose the source of the information it had received. Mrs X wants the laws around HMOs to be reviewed to better reflect public freedoms.
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 or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Housing Act 2004 sets out the law about HMOs including offences which can be committed, for example, when a person has control or manages an unlicensed licensable HMO. The Council has a duty to uphold this law and it is not fault therefore that it contacted Mrs X after receiving information that an offence may have been committed.
The Information Commissioner’s Office is the UK’s independent regulator in respect of information rights and is best placed to determine if the Council should have disclosed the source of the information to Mrs X.
We are not able to review HMO law as this is set by Parliament.
For these reasons, we will not investigate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, and we cannot achieve the outcome she seeks.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman