Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with the complainants housing application because there is insufficient evidence of fault. It would be reasonable for the complainant to ask the Council to carry out a review of the suitability of their temporary accommodation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about how the Council has dealt with her housing application. She says that her family’s current temporary accommodation is unsuitable and that she has been unable to successfully bid for social housing properties.

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
• 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))

3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council has assessed Mrs X’s housing application and awarded her Band B medical priority and assessed that the family need a 3 bedroom property, no higher than the first floor with wheelchair accessibility and a wet room.
7. The Council says that the type of properties that Mrs X and her family requires is in limited supply and that there are more than 30 families that need similar properties that have a higher priority that Mrs X. The Council considered bids from Mrs X for properties but found that they were unsuitable for the adaptations needed to meet her family’s needs.
8. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the suitability of her temporary accommodation. Mrs X has a statutory right to ask for a review of the suitability of her temporary accommodation, and she can appeal to the county court on a point of law if she is unhappy with the review decision. It is reasonable for her to ask the Council for a review.
9. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council has dealt with her application for social housing. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. Whilst I understand Mrs X’s frustration with how long the process of finding a property is taking, the demand for social housing outstrips the supply in the Council’s area. The Council has no duty to provide Mrs X with social housing in any timescale. Its duty here is just to let Mrs X bid with appropriate priority for social housing in line with the Council’s allocations policy. The evidence suggests it has done that.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault with how the Council has dealt with her application for social housing, and because it is reasonable for her to request a review of her temporary accommodation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman