Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the housing register. This is because we have already considered part of the complaint and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council should have placed him in band A on the housing register in 2016. He also says the Council has not followed the correct procedure in terms of assessing his request for medical priority. Mr X wants the Council to increase and backdate his priority and make a direct offer.

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))
3. We do not investigate complaints that we have previously decided.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. I also considered Mr X’s previous complaint to us, our Assessment Code, and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In 2019 Mr X complained to us that the Council should have placed him in band A in 2016 due to medical issues and disrepair. We decided not to start an investigation because it was a late complaint.
6. Mr X has now made the same complaint to us again. He also complains the Council has not properly assessed his request for medical priority or dealt with his concerns about poor energy efficiency in his home.
7. The Council considered complaints from Mr X in 2021. It noted he complained of disrepair in 2019 and, following an inspection by Environmental Health, his landlord carried out repairs. The Council told Mr X he did not qualify for band A due to disrepair but it invited him to report any issues with the property’s energy performance to Environmental Health. I have checked with the Council and Mr X has not contacted Environmental Health about energy efficiency.
8. The Council invited Mr X to reapply for medical priority and explained he would need to submit supporting medical evidence. Mr X submitted medical forms but no medical evidence to support the application.
9. Mr X says he did send medical evidence and says the Council has confused him with someone else because one email referred to Mr X as a woman. The Council apologises because it incorrectly referred to Mr X as a woman but it has confirmed to me that while Mr X has submitted medical forms he has not submitted the supporting medical evidence.
10. I will not investigate the complaint that the Council should have placed Mr X in band A in 2016 because we have already considered that complaint and made a decision about that complaint.
11. I will not investigate the complaint that the Council has not properly considered Mr X’s medical application because there is insufficient evidence of fault. This is because the Council has been unable to assess his latest request for medical priority because Mr X has not provided supporting medical evidence. Mr X would need to submit evidence to the Council. I appreciate Mr X has been on the housing register for many years but the fact he has not made a successful bid is not an indication of fault as Mr X has suggested. In addition, Mr X has not contacted Environmental Health to raise his concerns about the energy efficiency of his home.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I will not start an investigation because we have previously considered part of the complaint and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman