Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council removing him from its housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way it made its decision.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to remove him from his housing register. He said the Council had not properly considered his medical evidence or the reports of racism and harassment he had made. Mr X also complained the Council did not use a consistent communication method, which meant he missed the deadline for asking for a review of its decision.
2. As a result of the Council’s failings, Mr X said he remained in housing that was negatively affecting his mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the Mr Xand the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X joined the Council’s housing register in 2016. He later moved to a different property. In December 2022, the Council decided to remove him from its housing register because it said he did not have a housing need.
7. Mr X said there was a delay in receiving its decision because it was uploaded to his online account, rather than being emailed to him. This meant his review request was out of time. This did not cause him an injustice because the Council agreed to do a review in early February. It said it would make its decision within eight weeks. It did not do so, and Mr X complained in November 2023.
8. Following his complaint, the Council carried out a review and sent Mr X its decision on 1 December 2023. It upheld the original decision and explained its reasons. Although there was a delay in carrying out the review, this did not cause Mr X an injustice because the decision remained the same.
9. We are not an appeal body. Unless there was fault in the way the Council reached its decision, we cannot comment on the decision. We will not investigate further because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council carried out the review to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman