Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s allocations policy. That is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. We will also not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her priority banding. It is reasonable for the Council to complete a review or reassessment of her housing needs before we consider the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council’s housing allocations policy and how it awarded priority banding. She said it awarded people needing to downsize a higher priority than those with a disability. She also said the Council failed to ringfence modern properties for disabled people, despite these properties being more suitable for a disabled persons needs.
2. Mrs wants the Council to increase her gold banding to emergency. She believes this will increase her chance of finding and successful bidding on a suitable property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 or may decide not to continue with 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), as amended, section 34(B))

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. A councils allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants in the following categories:
• homeless people;
• people in insanitary,
• overcrowded or unsatisfactory housing;
• people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds;
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others;
  (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(3))
7. The Council’s policy gives reasonable preference to applicants in these categories. It then priortisies applicants in each category into one of four bands according to its assessment of their housing needs. As the Council’s policy gives reasonable preference in line with the law, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
8. The Council’s allocations policy awards emergency banding (the highest banding) to social-housing tenants in family accommodation looking to move into non-family social housing. Mrs X believes this discriminates against disabled people. However, is for the Council to decide what weight it gives to each of the reasonable preference categories. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. If Mrs X believes the Council’s allocation policy is discriminatory, that would be a matter for the courts.
9. Although Mrs X is unhappy that newer properties are not ringfenced for disabled people, we will not investigate this complaint further. The Council’s allocations policy states that where a property is adapted, restrictions on who can bid on it apply. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
10. Mrs X believes the Council has incorrectly awarded her gold banding in August 2022, and that it should be emergency. She has asked the Council to reconsider her banding. The Council has confirmed it intends to contact Mrs X to confirm whether she wants it to review her initial housing decision or make a new housing application. We will not investigate this complaint further. That is because there is little point in investigating how the Council dealt with her housing review request until we know the outcome of the Council’s reassessment or review. That is because we cannot assess any potential injustice until this process is complete. Mrs X can return to us once she has the Council’s decision.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough fault to justify investigating and we cannot assess any potential injustice until the Council has completed its housing review decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman