Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to rehouse her after promising to do so four years ago as that part of the complaint is late. We will not investigate the Council’s decision she did not qualify for its housing register because she had a right of review, which it was reasonable for her to use and because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council had failed to rehouse her after promising it would do so in 2020 after violent incidents near her home and said it had not considered whether she was eligible for priority on medical grounds.
2. Ms X said:
• she was living in unsuitable accommodation because she was sharing a one bedroom flat with two children; and
• the Council’s failure to rehouse her was affecting her mental health and her children’s development.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
6. 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
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

2020 to mid-2023

9. Ms X said the Council promised to rehouse her following a series of violent incidents near her home in 2020. She said she requested a transfer, but the Council was not able to consider it due to a cyber attack and, despite repeated contact with a housing manager, the Council did not make a decision on the transfer request.
10. We usually expect people to complain to us within 12 months of the events they are complaining about. Ms X complained in June 2024 about events from 2020 to mid-2023. There is no evidence Ms X could not have complained to us earlier and no good reason to investigate now, particularly as the Council may not have records for 2020 due to the cyber attack and contacts with the housing manager were by telephone so there may not be any evidence of what was discussed. Further, it is unlikely we could achieve a worthwhile outcome, given the lapse of time. Therefore, we will not consider this part of the complaint further.

September 2023 onwards

11. In September 2023 Ms X made a fresh application to the housing register. She said the Council issued a decision that she did not qualify in November 2023. She asked for a review of that decision but did not get a response.
12. In January 2024 Ms X told the Council about a change of circumstances following the birth of her second child. She also made a complaint about the Council’s failure to rehouse her and explained why her current housing was not suitable.
13. In early February 2024, the Council decided she did not qualify to join the housing register because she was not short of two bedrooms. And in late February, the Council responded to her complaint. It explained she could ask for a review of its decision she did not qualify and said it could not carry out a review in late 2023 as no decision had been made at that time.
14. Ms X asked for a review and the Council issued a decision in early March 2024. In its second complaint response, it explained she could appeal to the court on a point of law.
15. I have not seen the decision Ms X said the Council made in November 2023, although I have seen her requests for a review of that decision. It is not disputed the Council did not carry out a review, but this would not necessarily amount to fault. This is because Mrs X provided fresh information in January 2024 so the Council considered the application afresh. Further, even if there was fault, this did not cause a significant injustice because the outcome did not change.
16. Ms X said the Council had not considered whether she was entitled to medical priority. It was for her to provide evidence of her medical conditions, and how her current housing affected them, for the Council to consider. In any case, she has asked for a review of the Council’s decision, and it is reasonable for her to appeal to the court if she is unhappy with the outcome of that review. For that reason, we will not consider her complaint about the Council’s decision further.
17. Ms X also said she had been told in a telephone conversation that changes in the Council’s revised allocations scheme would not apply to her. There is no written record of that conversation, and the law says councils should allocate housing in accordance with the published scheme. The revised scheme sets out the circumstances in which transitional protection applies, but this does not apply to Ms X because she was not on the housing register on 30 September 2021. We will not consider this part of the complaint further because we could not achieve a worthwhile outcome by doing so.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her housing matter because part of the complaint is late and she has a right of appeal to the courts in relation to the recent housing register decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman