Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

Exeter City Council (202110849)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202110849

Exeter City Council

2 November 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 concerns the landlord’s request that a partition wall is reinstated.

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. The resident is a leaseholder of the landlord.
  2. The resident made renovations to the property 15 years ago to remove a partition wall. The resident explained that he was unable to produce confirmation that the landlord had provided permission for the renovation works. The resident stated that he was informed by the landlord that retrospective permission could be granted but subsequently, the landlord declared that the renovation works presented a fire safety concern and refused to grant permission.
  3. On 18 February 2021 the landlord wrote to the resident explaining that there must be a protected route to exit the property and requested that a wall was reinstated with a door between the kitchen and the entrance of the property.
  4. On 29 April 2021 the landlord explained that the resident was in breach of the lease because permission had not been granted for the renovations. The landlord informed the resident that he was required to reinstate the partition wall.
  5. The resident raised a complaint stating that the landlord’s understanding of the renovations was incorrect and as such, did not consider the renovations necessary. The resident questioned why the property posed a fire safety risk and highlighted that the landlord had not inspected the property before issuing a decision.
  6. The landlord provided a stage two response to the complaint on 23 July 2021. The landlord explained that, in its opinion, the renovation works did not conform to fire safety standards and provided the guidance it had replied upon when making its decision. The landlord stated that it considered it a reasonable request that the partition wall be reinstated for reasons relating to fire safety. The landlord explained that it was willing to explore payment plans with the resident in relation to the costs associated with the reinstatement of the partition wall. 
  7. The resident brought their complaint to this Service explaining that he did not consider that the request was reasonable. The resident considered that the landlord had relied on building regulations that did not reflect current guidance.
  8. The resident confirmed to the Service that the landlord had initiated proceedings with the First Tier Tribunal on 8 October 2021 and provided correspondence he had received from the Court.

Reasons

  1. Paragraph 39(h) and 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which:

(h) concern matters that are, or have been, the subject of legal proceedings and where a complainant has or had the opportunity to raise the subject matter of the complaint as part of those proceedings;

(i) 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 whether or not the landlord has the legal right to insist that they reinstate a wall they removed when renovating their property.
  2. The landlord’s position is that the current layout of the property poses a fire risk and that it has the right to insist that the resident reinstate the property.
  3. The resident believes that the landlord is relying on guidance which does not reflect current regulations.
  4. The complaint is currently being considered by the First Tier Tribunal.
  5. This Service cannot consider a complaint which is the subject of legal proceedings. Therefore, in accordance with paragraph 39(h) this is not a complaint that the Ombudsman can investigate further.
  6. Furthermore, this Service cannot issue a binding decision about a dispute concerning the meaning of or enforceability of a contract, this is a matter for the Court.
  7. I am therefore satisfied that this is not a complaint which the Ombudsman can investigate further.
  8. If the resident remains dissatisfied with this issue, they may wish to seek further advice, the following organisations may be of use.

www.citizensadvice.org.uk

https://www.lease-advice.org/advice/find-the-right-information-for-you/?step-option=61

https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/first-tier-tribunal-property-chamber