Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council reviewed Ms X's housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about how the Council completed a review of her housing priority. She says the Council has not properly considered additional medical information she provided, and the allocated banding does not reflect her family’s housing need. She wants the Council to offer her suitable housing to meet her and her family’s needs.

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 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

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X has been on the housing register since 2018. In early 2023, she requested the Council review her priority banding. She provided additional medical information to support her review request.
6. The Council’s housing allocations policy prioritises applications using banding criteria. Applicants assessed as being in band one have the highest priority, with band four being the lowest priority. Offers of accommodation are then made in line with applicants assessed housing needs and their priority banding.
7. Prior to the review, Ms X was assessed as having band one priority. The Council reviewed her housing file and considered the additional information she provided, along with the banding criteria set out in its housing allocations policy. It decided her current banding was correct and she should remain in band one.
8. Ms X is unhappy with this decision as she feels the additional medical information should increase her priority. However, she is already in the highest priority banding. The Council’s decision is in line with its housing allocations policy and so it is unlikely further investigation would find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman