Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled matters relating to a housing application. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council deal with a medical assessment application, we can’t add to its investigation into how bids were managed, and the Housing Ombudsman is better placed to deal with complaints about the condition of the complainant’s property. Other issues happened too long ago.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about how the Council dealt with his housing applications. Mr X says the Council did not process his medial application, placed in him a priority band that did not reflect the condition of his property and mishandled bids he made on 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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. 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)
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 information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X has been on the Council’s housing register since 2017 and has submitted medical assessment requests in 2021 and 2023. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council considered the original application and medical assessment requests in 2021 and 2023, because I see no good reason why Mr X could not have complained about these decisions sooner.
8. It would be reasonable for Mr X to make a complaint to the Housing Ombudsman if he considers that his housing association landlord is failing to address disrepair. The Housing Ombudsman has the power to investigate housing association, we do not.
9. Mr X submitted a further medical assessment request recently. 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. In this case the Council asked its medical advisor to consider the request, which it did along with Mr X’s supporting information. The medical assessor concluded there should be no change to Mr X’s medical priority. I see no evidence of fault in how it reached this decision so cannot question the outcome.
10. The Council did apologise to Mr X for allowing him to be shortlisted for a property that he wasn’t eligible for. I will not investigate this element of Mr X’s complaint because the Council’s apology is an appropriate response, and we could therefore not add to its investigation into this point.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault, we cannot add to the investigation carried out by the Council some elements are late and the Housing Ombudsman is better placed to consider others.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman