Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the complainant has not been able to move despite being on the housing register for a long time. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council has not provided him with a larger home despite the family living in overcrowded conditions and being on the housing register. Mr X says the Council is neglecting him and he wants to know why a bid he made for a property in Horfield was unsuccessful.

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 the complaint correspondence and the allocations policy. I 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. Band one is the top band. People bid for a property and the Council allocates it to the person with the most priority who has been waiting the longest time with that priority.
5. Mr X lives in a two bedroom flat with his wife and three children. One child has a disability. Mr X is on the housing register and is in band one. He is registered for a four bedroom property.
6. Mr X complained to the Council that he had not been offered a home. The Council explained he is in the top band with an extended priority date to reflect extra priority. It encouraged him to bid for all suitable homes in as many areas as possible. It pointed out there had been eight properties that he could have applied for but had not. It said, in July, that he had not placed any bids since April. It explained why he does not qualify for a direct offer.
7. The Council did not offer Mr X the property in Horfield because he was shortlisted in sixth place and the property went to someone who had been waiting for longer than Mr X.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council has placed Mr X in the top band which reflects the problems caused by his current accommodation. The Council cannot give Mr X any more priority. But, while Mr X is in the top band, he will only make a successful bid if he, amongst the other people who bid, has the most priority in terms of banding and waiting time. There is a shortage of social housing which means there are many people, living in unsatisfactory housing, bidding for a limited number of homes. The Council has also acted appropriately by encouraging Mr X to bid correctly and to place as many bids as possible.

Back to top

Final decision

9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman