The Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia (Ombudsman) recommended that the Housing Inspectorate of the Republic of Slovenia (IRSS) should try to further clarify what specifically is expected of the complainant with examples of evidence that would provide the IRSS with a sufficient basis for assessing the (non)existence of violations. At the same time, he also recommended that in the future, it should also consistently record telephone conversations and other forms of non-written communication with applicants/clients (e.g. in the form of official notes) in order to ensure the highest possible transparency of the authority's operations. After receiving the response from the IRSS, the Ombudsman considered the recommendation accepted, but not yet fully implemented. The already announced measures taken by the IRSS have, in principle, followed the purpose of the first part of the Ombudsman's recommendation, but the IRSS does not see the possibility of implementing the second part until the staffing is strengthened.

A complainant contacted the Ombudsman with serious allegations against the manager of a multi-apartment building regarding the selection of a contractor and the need for prior notification of the owners.  In her efforts, the complainant turned to many authorities, including the IRSS. She was not satisfied with the responses of the IRSS, mainly accusing them of abdication of responsibility and unresponsiveness. In this regard, the Ombudsman turned to the IRSS with an inquiry.

After examining the response of the IRSS, the Ombudsman could not confirm the complainant's allegation about the IRSS's unresponsiveness, as the IRSS had replied to her several times in writing, and at the same time also gave her explanations over the phone – since telephone conversations are not recorded at the IRSS, it could not prove this directly. The main part of the IRSS's explanations referred to the requests to the complainant to supplement her application so that the violation of Article 171 of the Housing Act (SZ-1) would be evident from her application, or at least indicated, and that the IRSS could examine the matter within its own jurisdiction.

The IRSS's explanations were adequate, but the Ombudsman nevertheless addressed the above recommendation to it, as he assessed that the proposed action regarding the complainant would be consistent with the principle of good management and, as such, also an example of good practice, as the recommendation to record all contacts of the IRSS with individuals would not only increase the level of transparency of the authority's operations, but would also offer a number of other advantages.[1]

In addition to the fact that the IRSS informed us of the measures already implemented and the way it works, [2] it also expressed its assessment that the recording of telephone conversations would be an excessive waste of time for it, and gave an assurance that it would try to take the Ombudsman's recommendation into account in the planned personnel reinforcements.

In particular, the Ombudsman could not accept this argument, since, for example, he has for many years established a regular record of every contact with complainants, both in person and by telephone, and regardless of whether the individual case meets the conditions for consideration as a complaint or not. Such a way of working has not had a significant negative impact on the operations of the Ombudsman; given the limited personnel resources, it has at most helped to increase the quality and speed of processing cases.

The Ombudsman therefore considered the recommendation accepted, but not yet implemented. We insist on it. We hope that the IRSS will follow through on its announcement about the implementation of the recommendation at the latest when staffing is reinforced. 20.1-8/2023

[1] Recorded contacts and given explanations can provide the authority, with appropriate information processing, a convenient database from which it can detect potential trends in open questions of individuals in its field of work, and this then also gives it the basis for an appropriate response to them. Furthermore, recorded conversations can significantly facilitate the verification and resolution of disputes and the implementation of controls, as they help to resolve potential disagreements more quickly. With this, the authority can also improve the transparency and efficiency of its own operations, both from the point of view of communication with the public and also from the point of view of the transfer of information between employees. Last but not least, the number and extent of communication, but only under the condition of adequate recording, can also provide it with additional decisive argumentation in its own efforts for, for example, personnel, financial and organisational strengthening.

[2] All inspectors are usually available to customers during office hours. The IRSS also regularly updates and supplements the general explanations on the website, and tries to provide customers with additional information in terms of a successful solution to their problems.