Summary: Mr X’s representative complained the Council did not handle properly Mr X’s application to join the housing register. We should not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. A representative complained on behalf of Mr X that the Council failed to take into account Mr X’s needs and supporting documentation when deciding he is not eligible to join the Council’s housing register. Mr X said as a result of the Council’s failure he has poor mental health and is unable to move on from his current accommodation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. 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

3. I considered the information in Mr X’s complaint. I also considered the correspondence between Mr X and the Council about his housing applications and the Council’s Housing Allocations Policy.
4. Mr X and his representative have had an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X lives alone. He moved into his current accommodation almost five years ago. The conditions of his tenancy only allow him to stay there for five years. He has some physical health issues which affect his mobility and has stress and anxiety.
6. The Council’s Housing Allocation Policy sets out the criteria the Council uses to decide whether someone is eligible to join the housing register and so be able to bid for social housing. If the Council accepts someone on to the register it will place them in a band to reflect their degree of housing need. The policy says the Council will not consider someone as eligible to join the register if it assesses them as having no housing need. It describes ‘no housing need’ as where someone’s circumstances do not warrant inclusion in any of the bands in the housing scheme.
7. Mr X applied to join the housing register in 2019. The Council said he was not eligible to join because he was adequately housed so had no housing need. Mr X asked the Council to review its decision. On review, the Council considered
   Mr X’s further supporting information and upheld its decision.
8. Mr X applied again to join the housing register in 2020. He had extra information because he had had his mobility assessed by an occupational therapist. The Council took into account the occupational therapy assessment but still decided Mr X’s current property met his needs, including his mobility needs, and he had no exceptional need to move.
9. Mr X did not ask the Council to review this decision. He made a new application to join the register, including new medical information. Mr X’s application is still awaiting assessment.

Assessment

10. We will not uphold a complaint if a council has followed proper procedures, relevant legislation and guidance and taken account of all the information provided, even if the applicant disagrees with the council’s decision.
11. Birmingham City Council’s policy allows it to decide an applicant does not have the housing need to justify inclusion on its housing register. The Council has considered two applications from Mr X and reviewed one of them. It took into account the information Mr X provided and made its decisions in accordance with its policy. There is not enough evidence of any fault in this process to warrant an investigation.
12. Mr X did not ask for the Council’s second decision to be reviewed. Instead he made a new application, with new information. When the Council decides on this application, if Mr X disagrees with the decision, we would expect him to use his right of review.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We should not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman