Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to properly assess Mrs X’s housing application under medical grounds. She says the Council has ignored its own occupational therapist report. This is because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council failed to properly assess her housing application under medical grounds. She says the Council has ignored its own occupational therapist report which notes her accommodation is unsuitable for her child’s 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. Mrs X’s child needs to have a specific procedure done at home. Due to the separate layout of their bathroom and toilet, and the size of the toilet, Mrs X is unable to perform the procedure properly. An occupational therapist (OT) had visited Mrs X to assess this. The OT’s report noted the family’s housing was detrimental to the child’s medical and health needs, as well as compromising the child’s privacy and dignity.
6. If we were to investigate, it is likely we would find fault causing injustice. This is because the Council does not appear to have considered the findings outlined in the OT report. In its review response, the Council stated it had considered all evidence. However, there is no analysis or rationale provided as to why the evidence from the OT report does not meet the criteria for Mrs X’s application to be awarded Band 2.
7. I do note the Council sought advice from its medical advisors in February, May, and July 2023. However, all three medical recommendations were given before the OT report (dated 11 July 2023) was available. This again suggests that consideration has not been given to the OT report. I have considered whether the last medical advisor might have been provided an early draft to consider. However, on balance, I am satisfied the advisor did not as there is no reference to the OT report or their findings in their advice.
8. I am satisfied the likely fault will have caused some uncertainty. This is because I cannot say what decision the Council will make once it has considered the OT report.
9. We therefore asked the Council to consider remedying the injustice caused by now considering the matter. The Council should consider the findings outlined in the OT report and decide whether it impacts Mrs X’s band priority. The Council will write to Mrs X to outline its consideration and decision.

Back to top

Agreed action

10. To its credit, the Council agreed to resolve the complained and will complete the above within four weeks of the final decision to put things right.
11. The Council confirmed it has made a referral to its medical advisors and provided a copy of the OT report.

Back to top

Final decision

12. 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