Housing ombudsman

Ever wonder why your landlord doesn’t seem to care if you complain or not? It’s one of the quangos that needs to be replaced when there is a proper people’s government in place.

Read on. We plan to look into better solutions in the future

what exceptions are there to take a case directly to the housing ombudsman where it is known that the housing provider has no real complaint process in place

Good question — and it’s a subtle but important one.

Under the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (England), the general rule is that a tenant must first complete their landlord’s internal complaints process before the Ombudsman will investigate.
However, there are several exceptions and special circumstances where a complaint can go directly (or be accepted early) if that process is missing, inaccessible, or dysfunctional.

🧭 The Core Rule (Normally)

Under paragraph 42 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (2024):

The Ombudsman may not consider a complaint until the landlord’s complaints procedure has been exhausted, unless there is evidence that it is not reasonable to expect the complainant to do so.

That “not reasonable” clause is the key exception.

⚖️ Valid Exceptions (direct access to Ombudsman)

Here’s what counts as not reasonable or impossible to go through the landlord’s process:

ScenarioHow the Ombudsman treats itSupporting clause or policy
No clear or functioning complaint processIf the provider has no working system, or staff do not respond, the Ombudsman may accept it as an exceptional case.Scheme ¶42(c) + Ombudsman guidance on early acceptance (Complaint Handling Code, Section 2.7–2.9).
Landlord refuses or fails to register a complaintIf they say “that’s not a complaint” or repeatedly block escalation, it’s deemed unreasonable to require exhaustion.Scheme ¶42(c); CHC ¶2.6 and ¶2.8.
Complaint procedure exceeds reasonable timescale (8 weeks per stage)If the landlord does not issue a stage 2 response within 8 weeks, you can escalate to the Ombudsman.CHC ¶5.6–5.8; Ombudsman early referral policy.
Complainant at risk (vulnerability, harassment, or health/safety)The Ombudsman can intervene early to protect residents.Scheme ¶42(b); CHC Section 3.4.
Landlord in administration, merger, or restructuringIf the entity no longer exists or can’t handle complaints.Scheme ¶42(a); Ombudsman case precedents.
Landlord refuses to engage with Ombudsman or acknowledge its jurisdictionOmbudsman may bypass internal handling and investigate directly.Ombudsman operational policy and case precedents (e.g., maladministration findings where landlords failed to participate).

🧩 What you should do in practice

If you believe your housing provider has no real complaints process, you should:

  1. Write a clear, dated summary of what you’ve tried — e.g. unanswered emails, ignored calls, no published procedure.
  2. Submit your complaint directly to the Ombudsman using their online form or email (info@housing-ombudsman.org.uk).
  3. Include wording like: “I am requesting early acceptance under paragraph 42(c) of the Scheme, as my landlord has no functioning complaints procedure and has failed to acknowledge or register my complaint despite multiple attempts.”
  4. Attach evidence — screenshots, emails, etc.

The Ombudsman will triage the complaint and decide whether to accept it immediately or refer it back (with conditions or deadlines).

📄 References

If you’d like, I can quote the exact wording from paragraph 42(c) and the relevant Complaint Handling Code sections that describe this “unreasonable to expect exhaustion” clause, so you can use them in correspondence — want me to include that?


is the UK housing ombudsman completely independant of housing organisations or is it in effect captured by those that it is supposed to regulate? Claude: Unfortunately it doesn’t let me copy the links or background research, so it will have to be updated/replaced at a later time (grok is down 🙂 )

I’ll search for current information about the UK Housing Ombudsman’s independence and governance structure.Let me search for more information about concerns or criticisms regarding the Housing Ombudsman’s independence.Based on the available information, the Housing Ombudsman has a structural feature that raises legitimate questions about independence: it is funded entirely by subscription fees paid by the landlords it regulates, calculated on a per-housing-unit basis.

This creates a potential conflict of interest that’s worth examining:

Arguments suggesting independence:

  • It’s established as an executive non-departmental public body sponsored by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
  • The Ombudsman itself decides how much subscription to charge members, so landlords don’t control the budget directly
  • The service is free for residents and designed to be impartial
  • Recent reforms have strengthened its powers, including the ability under the Social Housing Regulation Act to issue “wider orders” requiring landlords to evaluate policies and practices to prevent repeated service failures

Concerns about capture:

  • The fundamental issue is that those being regulated pay the regulator’s entire operating costs
  • Unlike some ombudsman services that receive parliamentary funding, this creates a direct financial dependency on housing organizations
  • There’s limited public information about governance safeguards to prevent undue influence
  • The ombudsman sets fees but still depends on maintaining membership

This funding model is common among UK ombudsman services but does create an inherent tension. Whether this amounts to “regulatory capture” depends on how strong the operational safeguards are in practice – something that would require deeper investigation into decision-making processes and outcomes data.

Scroll to Top