The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to penalise Mr X for an unlicensed House of Multiple Occupation. Mr X had a right of appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal, and it would have been reasonable for him to use it.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council has fined him because a property he leased to a third party operated as an unlicensed house of multiple occupation (HMO). Mr X says the Council should have fined the lessee of the property, not Mr X, who was responsible for getting the correct HMO licence. Mr X says the Council has treated him unfairly and wants the Council to withdraw the penalty.
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 has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended) A person can appeal a civil penalty to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) within 28 days of receiving the final notice. The Tribunal can confirm, vary, or cancel the penalty. The appeal is a full rehearing, not just a review of the Council's decision.
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 Council issued Mr X with a final notice and told him of his right to appeal to the Tribunal. This is the prescribed body in law to deal with such matters, and I have seen no evidence it would have been unreasonable to expect Mr X use his appeal right. So, we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it was reasonable for him to use his right of appeal to the Tribunal.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman