Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. It is reasonable for Mr X to seek a review of the Council’s decision to close his application. We will not investigate his complaint about being on the housing register since 2019 without being rehoused. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about his housing application being closed due to the Council saying he failed to engage with the allocations team about his application. He says he did provide responses to the Council and that it ignored his own enquiries in early 2023. He also says he has not been rehoused since he first applied in 2019 and that this is too long to wait. The Council asked him to provide financial details in 2023 which he says should not be a requirement for housing and was intrusive into his personal affairs.

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. 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))

4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council’s response. I have also considered the Council’s housing allocations policy.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X says he has been on the Council’s housing register since 2019 and has not bene rehoused. In March 2024 his application was closed because the Council says he failed to engage with its allocations team in response to contact made with him about his application details.
8. Mr X made a formal complaint about this and also about being asked to provide financial information which the Council assessed and made comments to him on his spending.
9. The Council told him that it has no duty to rehouse applicants within a certain timescale. Mr X has bene considered for vacancies in past years but it says he failed to meet affordability verification checks. We will not investigate his complaints about matters which took place more than 12 months before he complained to us.
10. The time for receiving complaints is from when someone became aware of the matter they wish to complain about, not when they complained to the Council or it issued its final response. We would expect someone to complain to us within a year, even if they were dissatisfied with the time the complaints procedure was taking.
11. The Council investigated Mr X’s company and did not uphold it. It then advised him to ask for a statutory review of the decision to close his application if he still wished to challenge this. Applicants may ask for a review under s.166A of the Housing Act 1996 if they disagree with a council’s decision on the application. It is reasonable for Mr X to ask the Council to review its decision on his housing application.
12. The Council says it asked Mr X to provided details of his financial situation because it is required to assess applicants for affordability as part of the verification process for considering suitable offers. The Council used an independent assessment tool to assess Mr X’s finances and determine if he was eligible for other support. The tool identified his spending and income and this was the information which the Council passed to Mr X for his own consideration.
13. 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. The Council’s assessment was made as part of the requirements of its housing allocation policy.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. It is reasonable for Mr X to seek a review of the Council’s decision to close his application. We will not investigate his complaint about being on the housing register since 2019 without being rehoused. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman