Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaint the Council has disqualified her from its housing register. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault with the way the Council has made its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Ms B, says she had been on the Council’s housing list for nine years and is living in a two-bedroom property with her four children aged 14, 10, 7 and 5. Ms B complains the Council has now disqualified her housing application for twelve months because she refused two properties the Council considers were suitable. Ms B complains the properties were not suitable and the disqualification will make it harder for her to move.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Ms B provided and the Council’s review of its decision to disqualify her housing application. I considered the Council’s housing allocations policy and images of the properties Ms B was offered, using Google Maps and Google Street View. I sent a draft decision to Ms B and invited comments before I made a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council’s housing allocations scheme says ‘Applicants who have refused 2 suitable offers of social housing will be disqualified from the housing register for a 12-month period, after which time a new application must be made’
6. The Council made offers of two properties to Ms B. She rejected Property A on the grounds it was a three-storey property and therefore had too many stairs for her son who has restless legs, ADHD, ASD and epilepsy. Ms B rejected Property B on the grounds there was no drive or adequate parking and there is a river running behind the property that her six-year old son would be drawn to.
7. As Ms B has refused two offers of social housing that the Council considers were suitable for her family, the Council has now disqualified her from its housing register. The Council has reviewed and upheld its decision.
8. While Ms B disagrees with the Council’s decision, the Ombudsman can only criticise the Council if its decision was made with fault. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault because the Council has taken account of the reasons Ms B provided for refusing the properties, medical information she provided and its housing allocations policy when making its decisions. The Council has explained it considers Property A was suitable because it has not received medical evidence to show Ms B’s son could not live in a three-storey property. And it considers Property B was suitable because there is on-street parking available and no river next to the property.
9. The Council has provided advice to Ms B on action she can take to try and secure private rented accommodation and support the Council could potentially provide to enable her to do this. The Council has also explained to Ms B she could seek a mutual transfer with another council tenant if she wants to explore this option.
10. I accept Ms B’s disqualification from the housing register will have an impact on her; however, the Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there are no reasons to criticise the way the Council has made its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman