Birmingham City Council (22 014 922)
Category : Housing > Allocations
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 27 Mar 2023
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and there were review rights the complainant could have used.
The complaint
- The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council refused his housing register application and did not tell him he would be ineligible to join when the homelessness prevention duty ended. Mr X wants to join the housing register.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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, or
- it would be reasonable for the person to ask for an organisation review or appeal.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and information about Mr X’s housing application. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.
My assessment
- Mr X asked the Council for help because his landlord had asked him to leave. In May 2022 the Council helped Mr X to get accommodation where he still lives. The Council wrote to Mr X in May to say the homelessness prevention duty had ended because he was accommodated.
- Mr X applied to join the housing register. He applied on the grounds the Council had accepted him as homeless. The Council rejected the application because it had not accepted him as homeless.
- Mr X asked for a review and submitted some medical information. The Council said he needed to ask for a medical assessment.
- The Council has recently told Mr X he does not qualify for the housing register on medical grounds because the evidence does not show his current home is having a detrimental impact on his health. The Council gave Mr X 21 days to ask for a review.
- I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council did not accept Mr X as homeless because it helped him to find a new home at the stage when he was threatened with homelessness. It was correct he could not join the housing register as homeless because he was not homeless. Mr X says he was not told that ending the prevention duty would affect his housing application but this did not stop him from applying.
- The Council invited Mr X to apply to join the housing register on medical grounds. The Council has since rejected that application because it decided the evidence does not show the accommodation is having a detrimental impact on his health. I will not comment on this decision because we do not act as an appeal body and because Mr X could have asked for a review if he disagreed with the decision.
Final decision
- We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because Mr X had review rights.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman