Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s housing application. The Council’s fault has not deprived Mr X of an offer of housing.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains:
1. In a letter, the Council said his housing register application had been in Band B since February 2022, when the correct date was May 2019.
2. He has been bidding unsuccessfully for properties for over 30 months.
2. Mr X says this means he and his family continue to live in overcrowded housing. He wants the Council to offer him a property.

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 any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and copy correspondence from the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X has been on the Council’s housing list for a two-bedroomed property, in Band 2, since May 2019. In September 2022 the Council wrote to Mr X replying to a query from him. The Council’s letter said Mr X had been in Band 2 since February 2022. The Council accepts that date was wrong and has apologised to Mr X. The Council said the error in its letter had no effect on the priority given to Mr X’s bids for properties on the housing list.
7. The evidence suggests this was just an error in a Council letter. I see no reason to believe Mr X’s priority date on the housing list was ever wrong. Therefore the error in the letter did not affect Mr X’s chances of rehousing. The error caused Mr X some concern. The Council’s apology is an appropriate remedy for that.
8. The Council’s website says the average waiting time for two-bedroomed properties is 30 months for an applicant in Band 2. Mr X has been in Band 2 slightly longer, so he suggests he should have had an offer of housing by now.
9. The Council told Mr X the information on the website is only approximate and times can change depending on demand and supply. I accept that, as the time stated on the website is simply the average. Some cases will be quicker or slower than the average. This might depend on, for example, how many other people join the housing list in a higher band, how many bids an applicant places and the popularity of the particular properties that are advertised in a particular period. Mr X has been waiting slightly longer than the average but that does not mean the Council is at fault.
10. Mr X asked the Council to make him a direct offer of a property. The Council refused. I do not criticise the Council for that. There is no evidence any fault by the Council deprived Mr X of an offer of a property.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence any fault by the Council has prevented Mr X getting an offer of housing. The apology is enough remedy for the Council’s error with the date.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman