Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel - find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

LiveWest Homes Limited (202202129)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202202129

LiveWest Homes Limited

2 August 2022


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 information about the ‘right to buy’ provided by the landlord when the property was let to the resident and their accepting the tenancy understanding that they had the ‘right to buy’ the property.

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 became an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord in September 2012. This tenancy came to an end in March 2022.
  2. The landlord issued its final response to the complaint on 16 November 2020 and the resident brought their complaint to the Ombudsman on 2 May 2022.

Reasons

  1. Paragraph 39(d) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, sets out that, “The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion were brought to the Ombudsman’s attention normally more than 12 months after they exhausted the member’s complaints procedure”
  2. The complaint has been brought to the Ombudsman almost 18 months after the landlord issued its final response. The resident has advised the Ombudsman that they did not bring the complaint within 12 months of the landlord’s final response because they had been in and out of hospital and because they moved to another property. While this is noted, the resident has not provided enough information to show that their hospital treatment and move to another property meant that they were unable to pursue their complaint sooner. In addition, the period between the complaint exhausting the landlord’s complaints procedure and the resident bringing the complaint to the Ombudsman was significant and nearly six months longer than the suggested maximum time set out in the Housing Ombudsman Scheme.
  3. We appreciate that this has been a difficult time for the resident and understand that our decision is likely to be a disappointing outcome for the resident. The resident may wish to seek legal advice to confirm the position on the right to buy.
  4. In conclusion, the Ombudsman cannot consider this complaint, as the resident referred it to the Ombudsman more than 12 months after it exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure.