Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to award Mr X a higher housing priority banding. This is because we would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to take into account information he submitted regarding his child Y’s health when he applied for higher housing priority banding.
2. Mr X said he has been caused distress and upset due to the Council’s actions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme which allocates housing to residents in order of priority. Mr X is currently in Band 5, which is the Council’s lowest priority.
7. Mr X asked the Council to increase his banding and provided information showing that his child Y, has a diagnosis of ADHD.
8. The Council considered the information and explained to Mr X that whilst it clearly showed that Y has ADHD, it did not confirm that Y’s condition was exacerbated by his current living conditions and was not grounds to increase his priority banding.
9. Mr X remains unhappy with the Council’s decision and wants us to find it at fault. The Ombudsman cannot question the merits of a decision the Council has made if it has made the decision in line with the correct process. The evidence shows the Council has considered the information Mr X provided but deemed that it is not sufficient to warrant increasing his banding. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council made this decision.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman