Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Miss X’s housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of her housing application. She says the Council has not reviewed her application properly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 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))
3. 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)

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. Miss X applied to join the Council’s housing register based on financial hardship and on medical grounds. Miss X noted in her application her existing home was too small for her household’s needs, that she could not afford to remain in the home, and that she had a medical need.
7. In April 2023, the Council issued Miss X its decision that she as ineligible to join the housing register as she did not meet the criteria. The Council noted Miss X was not in financial crisis.
8. In September 2023, the Council issued its review decision and again outlined Miss X was ineligible to join the housing register due to not having a housing need. The review noted:
• A hardship assessment was completed but noted Miss X was not in financial hardship. The Council considered Miss X’s stated income and expenditure, as well as the Association of Housing Advice Services (AHAS) guidance to work out reasonable expenditure.
• No housing need on medical grounds as no evidence Miss X’s condition was a life long or life changing condition. Also, no evidence as to how Miss X’s condition is affected by her current property.
9. The Council’s policy is clear that to be eligible to join its housing register, the application needs to have an assessed housing need. To have a housing need, at least one of the following must be met:
• Medical – current accommodation is unsuitable for household’s needs due to a medical condition.
• Welfare – covers a wide range of circumstances including someone moving on from care, someone who wants to live independently but requires additional support, or someone moving on from a drug or alcohol recovery programme.
• Unsatisfactory housing – housing assessed and a significant hazard identified.
• Overcrowding – current housing is lacking one or more bedrooms that is required for household.
• Hardship – need to move to prevent or alleviate hardship, including financial hardship.
10. The Council has outlined its reasons for why Miss X has not met the criteria to be assessed as having a housing need. The Council has considered Miss X’s evidence for why she feels she has a housing need under medical and hardship grounds. It is for the Council to consider Miss X’s evidence to decide whether it is satisfied she meets the criteria to join the housing register.
11. The Ombudsman cannot find fault with the Council’s decision if there is no fault in the decision making process. In this case, we are unlikely to find fault with the way the Council considered Miss X’s housing application. I note Miss X disagrees with the Council’s assessment of her income and expenditure. However, the Council is allowed to consider the AHAS guidance to determine reasonable expenditure when assessing whether someone is in financial hardship.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman