Summary: We will not investigate Miss Z’s complaint the Council did not properly assess her level of need for housing, or review its housing decision. The Council has accepted it did not properly refer Miss Z to the review process when she complained and has now agreed to do so.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Miss Z, complains that she had to wait seven years to be allocated a suitable property due to the Council having not accurately assessed her level of priority for housing. She also says the Council has not reviewed its housing decision in line with its housing policy.
2. Miss Z says this has caused a serious worsening in her mental and physical health. She wants the Council to provide a suitable property which can meet her family’s needs

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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 it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My findings

6. In early 2023, Miss Z told the Council of a change of circumstances about her housing needs and provided evidence of this. Four months later, the Council completed an assessment and issued a housing decision to Miss Z which awarded her Band B priority for housing. Miss Z complained about the housing decision but the Council did not uphold her complaint.
7. If we were to investigate this complaint, it is likely we would find the Council at fault because when Miss X complained about the priority banding it had awarded her, the Council should have advised her to request a review of its decision.
8. We therefore asked the Council to consider remedying the injustice caused by its actions by apologising and offering Miss Z a review of its decision.
9. The Council agreed to resolve the complaint in this manner and will apologise and offer Miss Z a review of its decision within one month of the date of this final decision to put things right.

Back to top

Final decision

10. 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