Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the complainant’s housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about the way the Council handled her family’s housing application and a housing offer Ms X thought the Council had made in 2019.

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 an investigation if we believe the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I considered the housing allocation policy. I invited Ms X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Housing allocation policy

4. The Council makes one offer of suitable housing to people on the housing register. There is a severe shortage of social housing.

What happened

5. Ms X is registered for a four bedroom, wheelchair adapted home. She currently lives with four other people in a two bedroom property.
6. In December 2019 the Council contacted Ms X about a four bedroom property that it thought might be suitable for the family. Unfortunately, in May 2020, the Occupational Therapist advised the property was unsuitable because it did not meet Ms X’s mother’s mobility needs. For this reason the Council did not offer the house to Ms X.
7. Ms X is currently first in the queue for a four bedroom adapted home but the Council does not have any four bedroom homes to offer at the moment. The Council is discussing with the family whether it could split the household into two. It says the family has recently viewed some properties.
8. In response to her complaint the Council agreed it could have been clearer, in 2019, that it was not formally offering the property but instead alerting the family that the Council might have a property it could offer. It said it contacted the family about the property because it needed to be sure it would meet the family’s needs before making an offer. It said it had reminded officers to make it clear if a property is being discussed at the pre-offer stage. It said it could not offer that house to Ms X because it would not meet her mother’s wheelchair requirements.

Assessment

9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice. I appreciate Ms X, and her family, felt disappointed and frustrated when they found out they would not be moving to the house they thought the Council had offered. However, even if the Council had been clearer at the outset, that the house was being discussed at a pre-offer stage, the family would still be in the same position as now, waiting for the Council to have a suitable house to offer. It is unfortunate the property turned out to be unsuitable but that is due to the family’s mobility requirements. In addition, the Council has explained that it has few large, adapted properties which is why it is now exploring alternative options with Ms X.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman