Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about housing allocations. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council only offered him sheltered accommodation and failed to take his medical needs into account. Mr X felt that he was being forced into sheltered accommodation that he did not need. Mr X would like the Council to provide him with a bungalow.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedure for allocating housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
7. Under the Council’s policy, individuals can join its housing scheme if they have both a local connection and a housing need. At the time of his application, Mr X had a housing need, but did not have a local connection. This was because he had not lived or worked in the area for long enough.
8. However, the Council’s policy outlines circumstances in which it can house individuals who do not have a local connection and, therefore, would not otherwise be eligible for housing. One of these circumstances is applicants who are over 60 years old. In this situation, the Council’s policy is to provide housing in sheltered accommodation.
9. As Mr X was over 60 at the time of his application, the Council placed him on the list for sheltered accommodation. Mr X was unhappy with this and asked to be considered for a bungalow instead. He provided medical information to support this request. The Council considered this but felt his needs could be met by sheltered accommodation. It did, however, give him priority need due to his medical needs. The Council explained this decision in a letter to Mr X.
10. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme. In this case, the Council followed its published scheme, and so there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. In any event, given the time that has passed since Mr X made his initial application, he could choose to apply again and may now meet the requirements regarding a local connection.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman