Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s assessment of her housing application. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Miss X, complains about the Council putting her in a lower band than she believes is appropriate for her circumstances. She says her son’s medical requirements should place her family in a higher banding.

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, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Miss X submitted with her complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response. Miss X has been given an opportunity to comment on a draft copy of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Miss X says the Council has placed her in Band 3 but her son’s medical needs mean that they should be placed in band 1 or 2 because they need to move urgently. She says that remaining in Band 3 could mean a wait of up to 10 years before a suitable offer of housing is made.
5. The Council reconsidered Miss X’s housing circumstances, including her son’s medical records when it reviewed her case in early 2020. The final outcome was that in May 2020 the Council reaffirmed its view that her banding was correct and that she did not qualify for a higher banding due to her son’s circumstances not meeting the urgent to move criteria.
6. We do not investigate complaints just because the complainant feels they should be rehoused by a council. We will not uphold a complaint if the council has followed proper procedures, relevant legislation and guidance and taken account of all the information provided, even if the complainant thinks that the council should have given more priority to their application to move.

Back to top

Final decision

7. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman