Summary: The Council was not at fault in the way it considered Mr F’s request for a review of its decision to provide him housing. This is because the Council granted Mr F a review of its decision, as requested. On this basis, the Ombudsman cannot add to the outcome already provided by the Council. Further, the Ombudsman has not identified fault in the way the Council considered Mr F’s housing application.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr F, is making a complaint about his application for Council housing. He says the Council has declined to review its decision to his application on the grounds his review request was late. However, Mr F says he did not receive notification of the initial decision. Mr F is concerned as the Council’s decision means he would need to submit an application again which would cause him delay in getting housing.
2. In addition, Mr F complains that the Council was wrong to reject his homelessness housing application on the basis he currently has a tenancy agreement. Mr F says he only has a license to occupy his current property.
3. Mr F wants the Council to undertake a review of its decision.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word 'fault' to refer to these. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended).
5. 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).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have reviewed Mr F’s complaint the Ombudsman and his request for a decision review to the Council. I have also had regard to the response of the Council, its housing scheme and applicable legislation. Both the Council and Mr F received an opportunity to comment on a draft of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

7. Section 175 of the Housing Act 1996 (the Act) states that a person is homeless if they have no accommodation available for their occupation, which they are entitled to occupy by virtue of an interest in it or have an express or implied licence to occupy. Under Section 179 of the Act, the Council has a duty to provide housing when a person is homeless.
8. The Council operate a policy that its decisions for housing carry a right of review by a senior officer of the Council. Its policy states that applicants or their representatives should request a review in writing within 21 days of being notified of a decision. The Council will consider the review within 56 days of the request. A longer period may be agreed with the applicant.

What happened

9. Mr F submitted a homelessness application to the Council for housing. In mid-September, he telephoned the Council to request the decision of his application. However, the Council informed Mr F a decision was made in August 2020 which was sent to him by email. The Council therefore sent the decision to Mr F again. The decision of the Council was that Mr F was currently occupying a property and therefore it did not owe him a homelessness duty. Mr F disagreed with the contents of the decision made.
10. In late-September 2020, Mr F submitted a request to the Council that its decision be reviewed. The grounds of his review request was that the Council declined him housing on the basis he currently has a tenancy agreement. However, Mr F says he only has a license to occupy his current property. On the same date, the Council responded that all review requests must be submitted within 21 days of the initial decision. The Council therefore declined to review its decision.
11. In October 2020, the Council exercised discretion and reviewed its decision to Mr F’s housing application. The Council applied its policy and following a review, it upheld its original decision.

My findings

12. In September 2020, Mr F telephoned the Council to request the decision about his housing application. On this basis, I have no reason to not believe Mr F did not receive the Council’s initial decision about his housing application. Further, I note the Council responded to Mr F’s request for a review on the same date he submitted the request. On the information I have been provided, the Council did not seek to understand why Mr F was submitting a late review request.
13. However, following receipt of further information, the Council decided to review its original decision. On this basis, I cannot identify any fault with the actions taken by the Council. Further, I cannot achieve the outcome Mr F wants as the Council has already provided it to him when it reviewed the decision in October 2020.
14. With respect to Mr F’s cause of complaint against the Council’s decision, the Council assessed his needs against its policy and determined he did not have any housing needs. This is because Mr F currently has occupancy at a property and Mr F has since confirmed this. On this basis, I cannot identify any fault with the way the Council considered Mr F’s housing application. Further, I cannot by law question the merits of a decision in the absence of fault. For these reasons, I cannot uphold Mr F’s complaint against the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

15. The Council was not at fault in the way it considered Mr F’s request for a review of its decision to provide housing. This is because the Council granted Mr F a review of its decision as requested by him. On this basis, we cannot add to the outcome already provided by the Council. Further, we cannot by law question the merits of the Council’s decision regarding Mr F’s housing application.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman