Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Mr Y’s housing application. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained on behalf of his son, Mr Y. He said the Council failed to properly consider Mr Y’s housing application in line with its policy as it did not award points for the amount of time Mr Y had previously spent on the housing register.
2. He said because of this, Mr Y had missed opportunities to bid on suitable properties.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
4. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr Y initially joined the Council’s housing register in 2010. In line with its allocations policy, the Council awarded Mr X additional points for each year he remained on the housing register. In 2018 the Council removed his application from the register as Mr Y had savings above what was allowed in its allocations policy.
9. Mr Y reapplied to join the housing register in 2020. The Council accepted him onto the register but did not reinstate the points awarded for the time he had previously spent on the register.
10. Mr X appealed that decision. In the Council’s response it said its policy did not allow it to reinstate previous waiting points. It said that its policy provided guidance on how it assessed new applications, or existing applications with a change of circumstance. Mr X complained.
11. The Council reviewed its decision further. It upheld its initial decision not to award additional points, explaining that it did not backdate waiting points from previous applications.
12. The Council has considered Mr X’s application in line with its housing policy. It has explained why it will not award points to include his previous waiting time on the housing register. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council has made that decision to justify our investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman