Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s housing application. This is because the Council has provided a fair remedy and there is not enough remaining injustice to require an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council took two years to backdate a housing application. He says he would have been re-housed by now if the backdating had happened earlier. Mr X wants to be re-housed.

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:

• the Council has provided a fair remedy, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

(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. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X lives in a two bedroom flat with his wife and two children. He is registered for a three bedroom home and is in band three on the housing register. Mr X complained to the Council and said his application should be backdated to 2017.
5. Mr X joined the housing register in 2017 but the Council closed the application in 2020 because he had not completed the annual review. But, in response to his complaint, the Council said it should not have closed the 2017 application because Mr X had submitted another application in 2019. The Council has now backdated the application to 2017. Mr X has remained on the housing register since 2017 and his highest bidding position for a property was 50. The Council says Mr X has not lost out on a property.
6. I will not investigate this complaint because the Council has provided a fair remedy by backdating the application to 2017. Given Mr X’s relatively low priority (band 3) on the register and his low bidding position (number 50), there is nothing to suggest he would have been re-housed if his priority date had remained in 2017. This means that, once the remedy is considered, there is not enough remaining injustice to require an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate this complaint because the Council has provided a fair remedy and there is not enough remaining injustice to require an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman