Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, an investigation would not lead to any worthwhile outcomes.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of her housing application. She considers the Council has overlooked her application in the allocation process and that other households with a lower priority and need have been allocated housing over her. She also complains about the Council’s handling of her complaint. She says the Council skipped responding to her complaint at stage one.

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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council awarded Ms X’s housing application priority Band 1A in November 2021. Ms X was assessed as having a need for two-bedroom, ground floor, separate kitchen, and outdoor space.
6. Ms X applied to add her mother to her housing application in 2024. Following an appeal, the Council agreed to include her mother on her housing application and updated that Ms X now had a three-bedroom need, which applied from April 2024.
7. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme which means people can bid for properties they feel are suitable. The properties are allocated to bidders who have the highest banding priority and priority date. The Council’s housing allocation policy sets out clearly how housing is allocated. The Council also confirmed that the average waiting time for a three-bedroom property for an applicant with Band 1A priority was seven years.
8. In September 2024, the Council reviewed Ms X’s application to decide whether emergency priority should be applied. Following consideration, the Council agreed that Ms X’s circumstances met the threshold for her application to be placed in Priority Band 1A Emergency. Ms X priority date was August 2024. Therefore, Ms X’s housing application now has the highest priority possible.
9. I note Ms X’s views that the Council is allocating properties out of turn. However, I have not seen any evidence to support this or to suggest the Council is not allocating properties in line with its allocations policy. Ms X confirmed she is only bidding for houses because she this is the only property suitable for her child’s medical conditions. Houses are inevitably more popular and so leads to more applicants bidding on them. Therefore, an investigation is not justified as we are not likely to find fault.
10. Further, the Council has subsequently reviewed Ms X’s application and now applied the highest possible priority. Therefore, an investigation would not lead to any further worthwhile outcomes.
11. As we are not investigating the substantive matter, we will not investigate a complaint purely about how a Council dealt with a complaint. While I acknowledge Ms X’s frustration at not receiving a stage 1 complaint response, she has received an appropraite remedy as she has been able to bring her complaint to the Ombudsman earlier to consider.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, an investigation would not lead to any worthwhile outcomes.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman