Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with the complainant’s her housing application. This is because we could not add anything significant to the Council’s response to her complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs B, complained about the way the Council dealt with her housing application.

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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint,
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

3. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. The complainant has had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs B originally complained to us last year. She said she had complained in 2020 about the lack of progress with her housing application. Mrs B said she had received an email from one of the two the housing officers she had been dealing with telling her they both were leaving and giving her an email address for future contact. Mrs B told us no-one responded to her correspondence, officers refused to enter into any dialogue with her and had refused to tell her the name of her housing officer. She said her complaint remained unresolved.
8. To put things right Mrs B said as a minimum she wanted

• officers to tell her who her housing officer is;
• consideration of the environmental health survey of her property;
• provision of the information she had asked for about equalities and allocations;
• officers to discuss her case with her and respond to her queries.

9. We asked the Council to consider Mrs B’s complaint. But Mrs B made a similar complaint to us again this year.
10. The Council has told us a choice-based lettings officer contacted Mrs B and discussed her application. The officer provided her contact details for Mrs B to use in future. The officer agreed its independent medical advisor would assess Mrs B’s medical information. But, after considering the medical advisor’s report, the Council decided not to award medical priority to Mrs B’s application. The Council told Mrs B she could request a review of this decision. It would be reasonable to expect her to do this if she wishes to challenge the decision because, if anything has gone wrong in the decision-making process, the Council is best placed to put it right quickly.
11. Mrs B has recently made a successful bid for a property but she withdrew her interest when she found out its exact location. It is open to her to continue to bid for available properties in her choice of areas.
12. We could not add anything significant to the Council’s response to Mrs B’s complaint about her housing application. The Council has said an officer has discussed her application and she has recently made a successful bid for a property even though she subsequently decided the location was not suitable.
13. If Mrs B has not received a response to her complaint about her request for official information the Council holds, it is reasonable to expect her to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner. That is because this is the body with appropriate powers and expertise to consider Freedom of Information Act issues.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint because we could not add anything significant to the Council’s response to her complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman