Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about her housing allocations application. This is because it is reasonable for Ms X to ask the Council for a review of its decision.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has failed to properly consider her medical evidence and award her sufficient housing priority points.
2. She says that as a result, she is sofa surfing and may become homeless.

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 it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal. (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 the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. 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)).
7. The Council’s allocations policy sets out how it prioritises housing applicants and allocates its social housing. If a person does not agree with a decision, they can request a review. The decisions the Council will accept for review includes a disagreement about the number of priority points awarded by the Council.
8. The Council considered Ms X’s priority need in 2023 and awarded her 500 points. This was based on the evidence she provided about her living and medical conditions. Ms X challenged this around two months later. The Council informed her she was too late to request a review but if she had new medical evidence she could request a new assessment.
9. Some time later Ms X made a new application. This included a letter from her GP. The Council said it would not accept the letter and required evidence such as a hospital letter. As a result, Ms X’s priority remained the same. The Council informed her of her review rights.
10. It is, or was, reasonable for Ms to request a review of the Council’s most recent decision. After she has done so, if she remains unhappy, she can return to the Ombudsman and we will consider whether to investigate her complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it is reasonable for Ms X to ask the Council for a review of its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman