Summary: We have decided to stop investigating this complaint. Ms B has moved to alternative accommodation, which is the outcome she wanted, and so there is no benefit in continuing our investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms B complained that the Council had not given her sufficient priority on the housing register. She said that because of this she had to remain living in accommodation where she was at risk of harm.

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 we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• discussed the issues with the complainant;
• considered the documents the Council has provided; and
• given the Council and the complainant the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

Housing allocations

5. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme. If a housing applicant is accepted on to the housing register, they can bid on properties advertised by the Council.
6. The allocations scheme sets out the rules for qualifying to join the housing register, how applicants are prioritised and how the Council manages the allocation of available properties.
7. The scheme places applicants in a priority band from Band A (highest priority) to Band D (lowest priority).

Homelessness

8. If a council is satisfied that an applicant is threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, it must help the applicant to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. This is called the prevention duty. In deciding what steps to take, the council must have regard to its assessment of the applicant’s case. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

Background and key events

9. Ms B applied to join the housing register in February 2024
10. The Council assessed Ms B’s application and she was accepted onto the register. The Council decided that the evidence she provided about her circumstances met the criteria for a Band B award due to threats of abuse, violence and harassment. She also met the criteria for a Band B medical award.
11. Ms B considered the Council had not given her enough priority and she requested a review of its decision.
12. The Council carried out the review and decided to uphold its previous decision to award Band B.
13. Ms B made a homelessness application to the Council in August. The Council accepted the prevention duty to Ms B.
14. Ms B moved house around two weeks later. The Council discharged its duty to Ms B because it was satisfied that she had suitable accommodation available to her for at least six months.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I have decided to stop investigating this complaint. The outcome Ms B wanted to achieve from this investigation was to move house, away from the accommodation where she was at risk of harm. Ms B has already achieved this outcome, and so there is no benefit in continuing our investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman