Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not allowing Miss X to have the support she needed to decide whether to accept a property offered by the Council and for failing to consider her mental health needs when considering her review request. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, it is reasonable for Miss X to ask the Council for a new review.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council did not allow her to have the support she needed to decide whether she should accept a property the Council offered her in 2022. She also complains the Council did not consider her mental health needs when considering her original review request.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
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 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))

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. In March 2022, Miss X viewed a property and signed a secure tenancy. As per the Council’s policy, Miss X’s housing registration was cancelled as she was classed as ‘housed’.
7. In response to our enquiries, the Council confirmed that at the time of the property viewing and offer, it had no record of Miss X having any vulnerabilities or of the need to have any support or reasonable adjustments when viewing properties. The Council also confirmed any professional support needed to assist with the property viewing would have been allowed. The Council also confirmed it told Miss X she had a few hours to decide whether to accept the property.
8. An investigation is not justified as there is insufficient evidence of fault. This is because there is no evidence to suggest Miss X made the Council aware of any vulnerabilities at the time, or that she needed/requested support at the viewing.
9. Miss X asked the Council to review its decision to cancel her housing registration. In her request, Miss X highlighted her anxiety caused by damp issues at her previous request and this was why she had requested a health and housing priority. No other mental health needs were raised.
10. In its review response, the Council responded to Miss X request for a health and housing priority due to her anxiety. The Council outlined its reasons for why it had not agreed to the request. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to support Miss X’s view the Council failed to consider her mental health needs.
11. In any case, the Council has confirmed Miss X can now request a new review, which she has done. Therefore, Miss X has another opportunity to raise her concerns about her mental health needs and to ask the Council to consider them.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, it is reasonable for Miss X to ask the Council for a new review.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman