Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the way the Council treated him after he applied for housing in its area, in particular that the Council unlawfully discriminated against him. This is because it is not unreasonable to expect Mr B to go to court.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr B, complained about the way the Council treated him after he applied for housing in its area, in particular that the Council unlawfully discriminated against him. Mr B told is he experiences constant harassment in his present 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, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
4. We cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered the information Mr B provided and the Council’s response to his complaint at stage one of its complaint process. I have given Mr B an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Councils must comply with the Public Sector Equality Duty to have due regard to the need to:
• eliminate discrimination, harassment and victimisation;
• advance equality of opportunity between those who share a protected characteristic and those who do not (protected characteristics include age and disability); and
• promote good relations between those who have a protected characteristic and those who do not. (Equality Act 2010, section 149)
7. When they have contact with public bodies, the Equality Act 2010 protects people against discrimination because of certain protected characteristics, for example disability.
8. In September 2019 Mr B contacted the Council to enquire about applying for accommodation in its area. Mr B told us the Council took too long to deal with his application, it failed to reply to his request for a review and it asked him to resubmit the information he had originally provided.
9. The Council has recently responded to Mr B’s complaint about his housing application. This was stage 1 of its complaint process. If Mr B is dissatisfied with the Council’s response, he can escalate his complaint to stage 2. We normally expect people to complete a council’s complaint process before we will consider their complaint.
10. In October 2020 Mr B told us he did not want us to consider his complaint about his homelessness application. He said the sole reason for his complaint to us was because he believes the Council has discriminated against him on the basis of his disability. He said he wanted to take the Council to court.
11. We consider complaints about the Council’s administrative actions. We do not have the powers a court of law has to rule on whether a council has acted in compliance with the law. So, as Mr B has told us his complaint is solely about whether the Council has discriminated unlawfully against him, it is not unreasonable to expect him to go to court. He has told us this is the route he wants to take.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is not unreasonable to expect Mr B to go to court.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman