Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s housing application. She says the Council has not awarded her an appropriate priority band. This is because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of her housing application. She says the Council has not awarded her an appropriate priority band as she says her household is severely overcrowded and her household has significant medical needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X applied to join the Council’s housing register. During a review, the Council decided to award medical priority to both Ms X’s children. The medical assessor noted that the main issue with the property was overcrowding.
6. The Council’s allocation policy notes that applicants placed in Band B will have demonstrated they have significant housing need, including if they have a significant medical need. The policy notes:
• the applicant will need to demonstrate the medical condition is being caused, or made worse, by the housing conditions;
• that the current property cannot be improved or adapted to meet needs at a reasonable costs; and
• that rehousing is likely to significantly improve the condition.
7. For Band C, the policy notes that:
• someone in the household has a medical condition that would be alleviated by a move to alternative accommodation;
• the need is urgent but the accommodation is not a threat to significantly exacerbating the condition; and
• a change of housing would make a substantial improvement in the quality of life of the affected person.
8. The medical assessment form does not detail why the assessor has decided medical priority should be awarded to Ms X’s children. The assessment only notes their diagnosis and then a decision that there is a medical need. The Council has also not provided any rationale for why the children’s medical priority/need only meets the criteria for Band C, rather than Band B.
9. Further, the Council’s policy is clear that overcrowding and lack of space is not considered a medical need. The latest medical assessment notes that the main issue with the property was overcrowding. Therefore, this creates confusion regarding what the Council’s rationale is for why it is satisfied Ms X’s children have a medical priority. It is not clear how their medical condition is affected by their housing conditions, separate to the issue of overcrowding.
10. Without a clear rationale, it is not possible for us to be satisfied the Council has properly considered the banding property awarded to Ms X’s housing application. Therefore, if we were to investigate, it is likely we would find fault causing Ms X injustice.
11. We therefore asked the Council to consider remedying the injustice caused by its actions by completing a new medical assessment and review. The Council should ensure it addresses the above issues by clearly outlining its rationale for:
• Why Ms X’s children have a medical need/priority.
• Why it is satisfied the medical need/priority only meets the Council’s criteria for Band C, and not Band B.

Back to top

Agreed action

12. To its credit, the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint and will complete the above within six weeks of the final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We have upheld this complaint because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman