Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s priority on the housing register because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, disagrees with the Council’s decision to place him in band 3 on the housing register.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes medical evidence and the Council’s review replies. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council places people in bands on the housing register to help it determine priority for housing.
5. The Council placed Mr X in band 2 because it had accepted a homelessness prevention duty towards him. The Council also made a band 3 award for overcrowding because Mr X lacks a bedroom.
6. In April 2020 the Council decided not to award medical priority because there was no evidence the flat was seriously affecting the health of anyone in the household. Mr X had 21 days to challenge the decision.
7. In 2021 the Council ended its prevention duty because it was satisfied Mr X had accommodation which was available to him for at least six months. Because the homelessness duty had ended Mr X was no longer eligible for band 2 and the Council awarded band 3 for overcrowding. The Council provided a detailed explanation as to why his overcrowding is not severe enough to qualify for band 2. Mr X disagrees with the band 3 award and says his son’s health is affected by the condition of the flat.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. I have checked the allocations policy and the banding decisions are consistent with the policy. If Mr X thinks he now qualifies for medical priority he can reapply; he would need to supply evidence showing the health of a family member is seriously affected by the flat. The evidence he has submitted so far does not show this. Mr X could also apply for a reassessment of the overcrowding once his next child has been born in September.
9. We are not an appeal body and have no power to change Mr X’s banding or arrange for him to be re-housed.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman