Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application and restrictions on bidding presented to Ms X under the housing allocation partnership of which the Council is a member. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about restrictions placed on her housing application bids by partners of a housing scheme which the Council is a member of. She says she was prevented form being able to bid on some vacancies by local connection and shortlisting restrictions imposed by some members of the scheme.

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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X says she has been prevented from bidding on some vacancies under the housing scheme in her area called Devon Home Choice. She says a housing association member of the scheme and another local authority told her that she would be ineligible to bid on vacancies which required a local connection with the area or had local allocation restrictions on certain properties.
6. Ms X complained to the Council about her frustration with the allocations scheme. The Council told her that although it holds the housing register and makes decisions on housing assessments and bandings, it has no control over the local policies and property restrictions of participating members to the scheme. This means that it cannot say which properties in other member’s areas are eligible for bids to be accepted.
7. 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 someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
8. In this case the Council did not make the decisions to restrict bidding on vacancies in occurring in other scheme members areas.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application and restrictions on bidding presented to Ms X under the housing allocation partnership of which the Council is a member. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman