Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Miss X’s housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice remaining which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her housing application. She says a housing officer completed the form over the telephone against her wishes. She says the details he entered into the form were not in the wording she would have used, and she has been unable to complete an online application for months following this.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X applied to the Council’s housing list in June. She says she was unable to complete the online form and telephoned for assistance to recall her incomplete application. The housing officer who dealt with her call told her he could complete the application by phone and proceeded to do so. Miss X says she was uncomfortable with this as she was unsure about the details being asked and what he was putting on the form.
6. The Council says its staff take many applications by phone and that the housing officer completes them as part of his role in assessing applications for priority. Miss X says she only needed technical assistance at the time. the Council says the call was terminated when Miss X raised her voice to the officer. She denies this.
7. When she saw a copy of the completed form later, she says that the officer had used wording which did not properly describe her situation and which she would not have used. He also ticked a box confirming that the applicant had completed the form when this was not the case. She made a formal complaint.
8. The Council apologised for any errors in the procedure and offered Miss X information on how to input her own application. The original application was voided following her disagreement. Miss X says she still had difficulty accessing the site. The Council offered to assist her by letting her complete an application in a COVID-secure environment at its offices.
9. To date Miss X has not completed an application. The Council has urged her to do so although it says she has not missed any vacancies for bidding to date due to a shortage of vacancies generally. It offered to backdate any new application which she completes to the date in June when she first applied.
10. The Council should have given Miss X the option to complete her own form when she had technical difficulty, even if its officer was trying to assist her by completing a telephone application. However, it appears that since she made a complaint she has been given the opportunity to make a fresh application and has not done so yet. If she does not accept the offer to make a new application by whatever means then she will not be registered on the Council’s system.
11. The Council’s offer was a reasonable remedy for Miss X to resolve the faults in service she encountered and there is insufficient remaining injustice which would warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Miss X’s housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice remaining which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman