Summary: Ms J complains the Council has not allowed her family a three-bedroom property need on its housing register. This is despite being presented with evidence to show they need these bedrooms, on the grounds of disability. Our decision is there is no evidence of fault, so we cannot question the merits of the Council’s decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms J, complains the Council has not allowed her family a three-bedroom property need on its housing register. This is despite being presented with evidence to show they need these bedrooms, on the grounds of disability.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Ms J;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered its response;
• spoken to Ms J;
• sent my draft decision to Ms J and the Council and considered their responses.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

Housing Allocations

5. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))

The Council’s Allocations Scheme

6. The Council’s Allocations Scheme places applicants in Bands (A being the highest and E the lowest), based on housing need. In relation to medical need, Band A is for an emergency need, Band B for an urgent need and Band C for a significant need.
7. The Allocations Scheme has a table for appropriate bedroom size. For a single person or couple with a child, the appropriate bedroom size is two bedrooms.

What happened

Background

8. Ms J is married and has a young child. Currently she and her husband (Mr J) live separately. Both Ms J and Mr J have disabilities. Of particular note to this complaint are that Ms J has disabilities requiring medical equipment and a hospital bed in her bedroom. Mr J has an autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Ms J say this leads him to being sensitive to stimulus, meaning he would struggle in an overcrowded bedroom and he sometimes needs a separate space in which to retreat to regulate his senses and controlling his behaviour.
9. Since 2022 Ms J and her family have been on the Council’s housing register. The Council at first gave them a Band C priority for two-bedroom accommodation.
10. In relation to their bedroom entitlement, the Council sought advice from its medical advisors. Their advice was a third bedroom exclusively for the use of the applicants was not “wholly medically essential” so medial priority did not apply.
11. Ms and Mr J asked for a review. The Council’s decision letter advised:
• it appreciated Ms and Mr J sharing a bedroom might at times present them with challenges. But an acute shortage of accommodation meant the Council could not “…accommodate requests for an allocation of separate bedrooms for couples in such circumstances”;
• a two-bedroom property would have three separate rooms. It was for the family how to use that space.
12. Ms J later asked the Council for a further review and included occupational therapist’s reports that Ms and Mr J needed three bedrooms, due to their disabilities.
13. The Council’s response noted the information Ms J had sent it. It advised that when it made its earlier decisions “…we were fully aware of the information and the issues raised in the reports. Therefore, a further medical assessment has not been completed and although we have considered the information there is no change to your entitlement to a two bedroom property.”
14. The Council refused to carry out a further review, so Ms J complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

15. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether you disagree with the decision the organisation made.
16. The fact the Council consulted with its medical advisor shows, on the balance of probabilities, that it did give some consideration to the possibility Ms and Mr J might need an extra bedroom. It also considered the evidence Ms J sent it. Its responses acknowledged that sharing a bedroom might present Ms and Mr J with challenges. But its view was other ways of managing the space were available, so the extra bedroom was not “wholly medically essential”. I am aware Ms and Mr J strongly disagree with that assessment. But in the absence of administrative fault in the way the Council reached it, it is not the Ombudsman’s role to criticise the Council’s decision.

Back to top

Final decision

17. I do not uphold the complaint and make a finding of no fault.

Investigator’s draft decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman