Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant cannot join the housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains the Council will not let her join the housing register and has not considered her exceptional circumstances.

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 cannot question whether an organisation’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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes the correspondence about the application and information about the family’s income and medical circumstances. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The allocations policy says people cannot join the housing register if they have a combined income of more than £36,000. This is the level set by the Council which means people can rent privately. The threshold is due to increase to £50,000 this year. The Council may accept an application when the income is above this level when there is an emergency need to move.
6. Ms X applied to join the housing register. She needs a larger home and different family members have health issues. The Council accepts Ms X has a need to move and there are medical issues. The Council considered adaptations to create an extra bedroom but declined the request because there are no mobility issues. The Council explained to Ms X that even if she joined the housing register it would be five to seven years before she was likely to move.
7. The Council rejected the housing application because Ms X has a combined family income of £66,970. The Council said it accepts there is a housing need but does not consider it counts as an emergency. The Council has agreed to meet Ms X, at her request, but says a meeting is unlikely to change the outcome because her income will still be over the threshold even when it is increased to £50,000.
8. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The family income exceeds the financial threshold and will continue to do so after the threshold is increased to £50,000. Ms X says the Council fabricated her income but I have seen evidence the Council reached this figure after doing a detailed assessment of the family income. In addition, due to the severe shortage of social housing, especially for the size of home that Ms X needs, joining the housing register would not provide an immediate solution to the current housing difficulty or promptly alleviate any exceptional need.
9. The Council accepts Ms X has a housing need but also notes she is ineligible to join the housing register due to her income. It has considered the evidence she has submitted but has decided not to treat her circumstances as an exceptional. We are not an appeal body and it is not for us to decide whether Ms X should be treated as an exception. There is no suggestion of fault in the way the Council has reached this decision and the fact that Ms X disagrees is not an indication of fault. We cannot intervene simply because a council makes a decision that someone disagrees with.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman