The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to act under the Building Act 1984 or the Environmental Protection Act 1990. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.
The complaint
Mr X lives in a building which includes a flying freehold. He says the Council has failed to take action on possible dangerous property conditions and nuisance.
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.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. The Council has confirmed : it inspected the property and found no danger to the public; therefore it has no power to act under the Building Act rainwater ingress is a civil matter for the property owners it has considered the Land Registry documents which show the roof belongs to the top flat and it could only serve a Notice on the owner of the top floor flat if rainwater is getting into the flats below; and if the Council were to serve a Notice which was not complied with, it does not automatically follow that the Council will carry out works in default.
In view of the above there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision not to act to resolve the issues raised by Mr X.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman