Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mrs X’s housing application and support it provided to prevent her homelessness. Part of the complaint is late and there is insufficient evidence of fault in how it reviewed her priority and the support it provided to prevent her homelessness.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her housing application. She says the Council has refused to backdate the date she joined the housing register after changing its systems in 2020 and has refused her request for increased priority for overcrowding. She also said the Council has not supported her and her family when they were threatened with homelessness.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. We cannot look at Mrs X’s complaint about when she joined the housing register. This is because Mrs X would have known about this decision from August 2020, and so this complaint is late. There is no good reason why she could not have complained about this sooner and so we will not investigate.
7. When Mrs X told the Council her property was overcrowded in March 2022, the Council appropriately reviewed Mrs X’s housing priority. It assessed her housing situation in line with its housing allocations policy, which sets out its criteria for overcrowding and how many rooms it considers sufficient for the number of people residing in a property. It decided Mrs X’s property was not overcrowded and did not increase her priority. This decision was in line with its allocations policy and so further investigation of this point would be unlikely to find fault.
8. When Mrs X’s landlord gave notice to repossess the property in November 2022, the Council accepted a duty to help prevent Mrs X and her family from becoming homeless and provided her with a personal housing plan. The Council’s complaint response says that despite giving Mrs X two months’ notice, the landlord has not yet gained a possession order and so Mrs X and her family can continue to live in the property. It says if the landlord does gain a possession order, it will provide assistance at that time. As Mrs X has not been served a possession order and is continuing to live in the property, it is unlikely that further investigation would find the Council at fault.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because part of the complaint is late and there is insufficient evidence of fault in how it reviewed her housing priority and the support provided to prevent her homelessness.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman