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

LiveWest Homes Limited (202334333)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202334333

LiveWest Homes Limited

23 June 2025


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:
    1. The landlord’s upkeep of a river wall and pathway.
    2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s request that it provide him with documents and reports relating to the collapse and subsequent repair of the river wall in 1986.
    3. The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns that the collapse of the river wall in 2020 was foreseeable, as the result of repair work undertaken in 1986.

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 complaints, as set out above, are not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction to investigate.

Summary of events

  1. The resident is a leaseholder of a flat in a four-storey block. The landlord is the freeholder.

 

  1. In 1986 works were completed to repair the river wall. The block was built in or around 1988 and the landlord became the freeholder in 2014. The resident bought his flat in August 2020.

 

 

  1. The flats are located next to a river. The boundaries of the land owned by the landlord extends to and beyond the river wall. The resident’s lease says that the landlord must maintain the building, including walls. It also says that the leaseholder must pay a service charge and that the costs of maintenance must be included in the service charge.

 

  1. On 11 January 2020 a section of the river wall collapsed. The landlord informed residents that it was responsible for repairing the wall and it would need to recover these costs from them through their service charge and sinking fund. The section 20 consultation process began in March 2020. Works to repair the river wall began in May 2023 and have since completed.

 

 

  1. In May 2023, the resident complained to the landlord about the repairs to the river wall and its buildings insurance cover. The resident referred his complaint to this Service, and it is being investigated under case 202306630.

 

  1. In August 2023, the resident raised a complaint with the landlord in relation to the matters above. The landlord issued its final response to the resident’s complaint on 28 September 2023.

Reasons

  1. Paragraph 42.c. of the Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not investigate complaints that ‘were not brought to the attention of the member as a formal complaint within a reasonable period which would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising’. The resident’s complaint is that an inadequate repair to the wall in 1986 meant that its collapse in 2000 was inevitable. We are unable to investigate matters relating to the repair of the river wall in 1986, because of the time that has passed since this had happened.
  2. For the same reasons, we are unable to consider whether the landlord’s upkeep of the river wall prior to 2020 had contributed to the wall’s collapse. Neither can we consider whether there was a service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request that it provide him with documentation in relation to the repair of the river wall in 1986.
  3. Complaints about access to data, requested as part of a Subject Access Request, are considered by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and are therefore outside of our jurisdiction to investigate under paragraph 42.j. of the Scheme which says the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which fall properly within the jurisdiction of another Ombudsman, regulator or complaint-handling body. If the resident wishes to pursue this aspect of his complaint, he can find information about the ICO by visiting its website www.ico.org.uk 
  4. Paragraph 42.f. of the Scheme says that the Ombudsman may not consider 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, other tribunal or procedure.
  5. Our approach to complaints, governed by the Scheme, is that we take an ‘inquisitorial’ approach, rather than an ‘adversarial’ one. In practice, this means that we act impartially whilst investigating disputes rather than taking up one side of the dispute. We cannot act like a court, considering opposing positions on a matter and deciding who is right or wrong, or providing answers to issues raised by a resident.
  6. The resident’s complaint concerns the liability in tort of the landlord and its compliance with the terms of his lease. We are not able to consider issues such as breach of contract, liability in tort, or award damages in the way that a court can do. The Ombudsman therefore finds that his aspect of the complaint is outside of our jurisdiction to investigate, and the resident may wish to obtain independent legal advice.