Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his housing register application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making. The Council has apologised for its delay in making decisions, which is sufficient to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to award band 3 priority on its housing register and about delays in decision-making. He said Council failings mean his family is living in unsuitable housing.

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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

What happened

5. In May 2023, Mr X sent the Council’s housing team a report prepared by children’s social care, which concluded his children should have separate bedrooms. There is no evidence the housing team received this.
6. After further communication, including with the local M.P, Mr X sent a further copy of the report to the housing team in November 2023. In December 2023, the Council confirmed to the M.P that the housing register application already recognised the children need their own bedrooms. The Council did not issue a formal decision with review rights until March 2024. In its complaint response, it apologised for its delay in considering the report.
7. Mr X asked the Council for a review, but his request was overlooked. Following the complaint to us, the Council agreed to carry out a review in December 2024 and it issued a decision in January 2025. In its decision, the Council:
• apologised for the delay in carrying out a review;
• explained the band 3 priority already recognised the children need their own bedrooms;
• explained the case did not meet the criteria for referral to its Social Needs Panel because the family were not occupying unsatisfactory housing that poses an ongoing and severe threat to the wellbeing of anyone in the household;
• explained the case did not meet the criteria for a direct offer of housing;
• considered whether Equality Act 2010 duties mean it should exercise discretion to either award higher priority or make a direct offer of housing, but decided the circumstances were not sufficiently exceptional to warrant this; and
• confirmed band 3 priority was appropriate.

My assessment

8. The Council received the children’s social care report in November 2023, but did not issue a formal decision with review rights until March 2024. It then overlooked Mr X’s review request, although it carried out the review without delay when we contacted it. These delays will have caused Mr X some frustration, but the outcome was not changed. In these circumstances, an apology is a sufficient remedy for the injustice caused and further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
9. We are not an appeal body. It is not our role to say whether the Council’s decisions are correct. Unless we find fault in the decision-making process, we cannot comment on the decision reached.
10. The review decision shows the Council considered all relevant factors, including its published allocations scheme, and it explained the reasons for its decision. We will not investigate further because there is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the priority the Council awarded on its housing register because there is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making process to justify our involvement. The Council has apologised for delays in making its decisions and further investigation is not likely to lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman