Cornwall Council (202009312)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202009312

Cornwall Council

13 April 2021


Our approach

What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. The Ombudsman must determine whether a complaint comes within their jurisdiction. The Ombudsman seeks to resolve disputes wherever possible but cannot investigate complaints that fall outside of this. 

In deciding whether a complaint falls within their jurisdiction, the Ombudsman will carefully consider all the evidence provided by the parties and the circumstances of the case.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of reports of lead in the water supply and the effects this has had on the health of the resident’s child.

Determination (jurisdictional decision)

  1. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
  2. After carefully considering all the evidence, I have determined that the complaint, as set out above, is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Summary of events

  1. In December 2020, the resident contacted our Service to complain about an ongoing issue they have had with their landlord. The resident told this Service that there has been lead in their water pipes since 2015 and that this has resulted in their child having lead poisoning. The resident went on to say that their child has now been diagnosed with dyslexia and dyspraxia.
  2. On 24 December 2020, the landlord wrote to the resident under its stage 1 complaint process and stated that it had commenced an investigation, but that at present time, it was unable to provide a conclusion to the complaint made, other than to find it ‘undetermined’. The landlord asked the resident in that letter to provide a full chronology of events, medical evidence and any other supporting evidence not already submitted.
  3. On 12 January 2021, the landlord wrote to the resident and confirmed that the complaint issues raised by the resident could not proceed through its internal complaints process. The landlord informed the resident that should they wish to progress the complaint, they would need to seek legal advice.
  4. The resident had further dealings with our Service and asked for our assistance, whereby this Service wrote to the landlord for clarification. The landlord replied to this Service on 15 February 2021. Its letter confirmed that it did not believe an alternative conclusion could have been reached at stage 2 of its internal complaints procedures. It therefore confirmed that this response was its final response on the matter.

Reasons

  1. Paragraph 39 (i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that:

“The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion: concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure.”

  1. The resident’s complaint turns on their belief that the landlord should be held responsible for their child’s diagnoses of dyslexia and dyspraxia, due to supposed traces of lead in the resident’s water supply.
  2. This Service cannot consider a complaint about personal injury arising from alleged lead poisoning. Such a matter like this, can only be considered through the Courts. Therefore, this is not a complaint that the Ombudsman can investigate further.