Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of Ms B’s complaint. Part of it relates to matters which are out of time, or carried rights of appeal, and part of it is a matter she has not yet made a complaint to the Council about. In addition to this, there is no evidence of fault in how the Council has made its decision, and so it would not be proportionate to continue our investigation.

The complaint

1. I will refer to the complainant as Ms B.
2. Ms B complains the Council has arranged a managed move for her to a one-bedroom property, despite the fact she needs a second bedroom for medical reasons.

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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court or to a tribunal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I reviewed Ms B’s correspondence with the Council, a report the Council wrote in May 2021, and several supporting letters from Ms B’s GPs.
7. I also shared a draft copy of this decision with each party for their comments.

Back to top

What I found

8. Ms B has several mental health conditions, including obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).
9. Until late 2022, Ms B was living in a ground-floor, two-bedroom housing association property. For several years she had had a poor relationship with her neighbours. This was because, as a result of her mental health conditions, she found the noise they created intolerable. In response, Ms B had taken to playing loud music, which had in turn caused the neighbours to complain about her. As a result of these complaints, the Council issued Ms B with a community protection notice (CPN), and then prosecuted her for breaching it.
10. Under the Council’s housing allocations policy, Ms B was ineligible to apply for a move to a different property because of the CPN. However, in May 2021, the Council’s housing team wrote a report seeking an exception to the policy, and accept an application from Ms B to move, because it felt this was only way to resolve the problem. In November 2021 the Council’s housing management agreed to this.
11. Ms B had also made a complaint to the Council around this time about her situation. As part of her complaint she stressed she needed a property with two bedrooms and a garden to facilitate drying her clothes, which was an important and constant part of her daily OCD rituals. However, while the Council’s report noted Ms B’s request for a second bedroom, it said she had not provided any evidence to support this requirement, and concluded she needed only a one-bedroom property, as would be normal for a single person household.
12. In February 2022, Ms B obtained and submitted to the Council a letter from her GP, saying it was “imperative” she have a two-bedroom to help manage her mental health conditions.
13. In September 2022, Ms B made a complaint to the Ombudsman. This complaint focussed on the fact she was still in the original property at time and enduring the dispute with her neighbours. Ms B did not submit any evidence she had made a formal complaint to the Council at that time, and so we referred the matter back to the Council as premature.
14. In October Ms B contacted us to say the Council was about to move her to a different property, but as this only had one bedroom it had not resolved her complaint. Then, in December, the Council wrote to us to explain it had dealt with Ms B’s formal complaint in 2021. It also informed us Ms B had now moved.

Back to top

Analysis

15. Ms B’s original complaint to us concerned matters which had been ongoing, according to her, since 2015. This culminated in her complaint to the Council which was concluded in 2021.
16. The law says a person should approach the Ombudsman within 12mths of becoming aware of the issue they wish to complain about. Ms B did not approach us until September 2022, and so anything which she was aware of before September 2021 – and therefore the bulk of her complaint – is late under this rule.
17. The law also prevents us from looking into any matters concerning the issue of the CPN, because it carried a statutory right of appeal, or Ms B’s prosecution for breaching it, as this is a matter which has been put before a court.
18. For these reasons, we cannot look at any matter which preceded the Council’s decision to move Ms B to a one-bedroom property, and the subsequent implementation of that decision.
19. Ms B’s complaint has now evolved because of her move to a new property. However, she has not actually made a formal complaint about this, which is required before we may accept a complaint for investigation.
20. And Ms B also had the statutory right to request a review of the suitability of her current property. Again, the law says we should not normally accept a complaint for investigation where such a right exists.
21. Even putting these points to one side, however, I do not consider it would be proportionate to continue investigating this complaint.
22. The Ombudsman’s role is to review how councils have made their decisions. We may criticise a council if, for example, it has not followed an appropriate procedure, not considered relevant information, or not explained why it has made a particular decision.
23. But we do not provide a right of appeal against council decisions, or replace their decisions with our own. If we do not find fault in how a decision has been made, we cannot criticise it, no matter how strongly a complainant feels it is wrong. We do not uphold complaints simply because someone disagrees with what a council has done.
24. In this case, I note there is a letter from Ms B’s GP saying it is imperative she have a second bedroom to help manage her conditions. There are also two other older GP’s letters, recording that she had told doctors she needed a second bedroom. I accept, therefore, there is some evidence to support this need.
25. However, the decision remains the Council’s to make, and it is not obliged to accept a doctor’s opinion, no matter how compelling it appears.
26. We asked the Council to comment on this. Over two separate emails, it said:

“[We] did not receive sufficient evidence that she must have 2 bedrooms in order to deal with her [mental health problems]. We are not stating that she did not provide evidence that these existed, we recognise that [Ms B] does suffer from these conditions, however, due to housing demand from households who require additional bedrooms for household members we did not feel it reasonable for a second bedroom for washing. The applicant has a property with a garden that will assist with this in the summer months, however, alternative arrangements need to be made indoors in winter.”

“The housing authority can consider medical support, however, the decision to award a priority for two bedrooms falls with the council and not medical professionals and the offer of [Ms B’s] current home was in line with the [allocations policy]. The council must balance the need for accommodation against the supply available to make best use of the stock.”

27. I am satisfied this demonstrates the Council has given proper consideration to the question of Ms B’s bedroom need, and has explained properly why it has declined her request for a second bedroom. There is no evidence of fault here.
28. I appreciate Ms B does not agree with this decision, but as I have explained, this does not provide a reason for me to uphold her complaint; and, as I do not consider further investigation will lead to a different outcome, I do not consider it would be proportionate.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I have discontinued my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman