Summary: Mr X complains that the Council failed to consider medical evidence when making its decision about his housing allocation. He says his partner sleeps on the floor or sofa, and this has a detrimental impact on his partner’s mental health. The Ombudsman does not find the Council at fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr X, complains that the Council failed to consider medical information when making its decision about his housing allocation.
2. Mr X says his partner sleeps on the floor or sofa, and this has a detrimental impact on his partner’s mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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

4. I considered the information and documents provided by Mr X and the Council. I spoke to Mr X about his complaint. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on an earlier draft of this statement. I considered all comments and further information received before I reached a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

5. Councils must have an allocation scheme to determine priorities and set out the procedure it will follow when allocating housing. Each council’s allocations scheme will be different but in general most will award 'reasonable preference' to allocations by awarding points or placing an applicant in a certain priority band. Applicants have a right to request a review of a council’s decision about the number of points or band they have been awarded.

What happened

6. Mr X lives with his partner, Mr P. They are on the Council’s housing waiting list for a one-bedroom property.
7. In August 2020, Mr X sent the Council an occupational therapist’s report and asked the Council for two bedrooms. This report confirmed Mr X’s health problems. It said Mr X needed a one-bedroom property. The Council emailed Mr X the same day. It said the report did not suggest two bedrooms. It said it would not consider Mr X for a two-bedroom property without evidence or a recommendation from professionals.
8. Mr X appealed the Council’s decision. He said Mr P has mental health problems which mean Mr P sleeps on the floor or on the sofa at night.
9. The Council asked Mr X’s GP for information. In September, the Council got a report from Mr X’s GP. This report does not mention Mr P.
10. The Council responded to Mr X’s appeal. It said it considered all the information it had dating back to 2015. It said the occupational therapist’s report Mr X submitted did not say they needed two bedrooms. The Council said none of the professionals said Mr X and Mr P need separate bedrooms. It said that Mr X and Mr P did not meet the criteria for a two-bedroom property.
11. Mr X asked that the Council review his appeal at the final stage.
12. The Council asked Mr P’s GP for information. In October, the Council got a report from Mr P’s GP. This confirmed that Mr P disturbs Mr X at night because Mr P does not have his own space. The GP reported that Mr P said his mental health is affected by sleeping on the sofa, and that Mr P wants his own space.
13. In its final review, the Council said it had reviewed the GP’s report. It said the information from the GP was already reflected in the initial assessment of Mr X’s and Mr P’s housing needs.
14. The Council said it appreciated that sleep deprivation was not conducive to good mental health, but this did not support a case for Mr X and Mr P to be placed on the housing waiting list for a two-bedroom property. It said it would reassess Mr X’s application if there was new evidence to support his case.
15. Mr X then complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

16. Mr X complains that the Council failed to consider medical information. I do not agree with Mr X. At each stage, I find that the Council considered the medical information Mr X provided.
17. Mr X says the GP and a psychiatrist recommend separate bedrooms for Mr X and Mr P.
18. I have seen the medical evidence Mr X provided. Nowhere in any of the medical information, including doctor’s reports, does it say that Mr X and Mr P have a medical need for separate bedrooms. Further to this, I have seen no medical evidence which recommends that Mr X and Mr P have separate bedrooms.
19. The Council cannot award a co-habiting couple separate bedrooms without medical evidence to prove there is a medical need for separate bedrooms. In this case, I find the Council properly considered Mr X’s application and appeal, and considered all the medical evidence as it should have. For this reason, I do not find the Council at fault.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I have completed my investigation and I do not uphold Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman