Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s treatment of Mr X’s application for social housing. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X said it was not fair that the Council turned down his application for social housing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

2. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
3. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The complaint correspondence shows Mr X came to the UK as an unaccompanied child. It shows he has since suffered an unprovoked life-threatening knife attack by a stranger.
5. The correspondence shows Mr X applied for social housing after leaving care. The Council considered his application via a panel more than once. This is because the panel re-heard the case after the stabbing. It gave reasons, laid out in the complaint correspondence, why it did not award Mr X sufficient points for social housing. The Council offered instead to act as guarantor for Mr X to apply for private rented accommodation and to pay his first month’s rent.
6. The Council had two duties. The first was to consider the case Mr X put forward about his need for social housing. The complaint correspondence shows it did so, giving reasons for its decision. We cannot substitute our view for the Council’s view as it reached its decision properly. The second duty was to assist Mr X to avoid homelessness. It did this by offering to stand as guarantor and pay the first month’s rent for Mr X in private rented accommodation. Had he accepted the offer, the Council would then only have had a further duty if he later became at risk of homelessness. It would not be responsible if he refused the offer.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant this.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman