Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that she cannot join its housing register and how it handled a request for a review of its decision. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to warrant an investigation. Additionally, there is not enough evidence any delays by the Council in completing a review caused a significant injustice to Miss X.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s decision not to let her join its housing register after she applied. She also complained that she asked the Council to review its decision but it did not respond to her request or her complaint. She said her current housing was impacting her and her family’s health. She wanted the Council to complete a review of its decision and respond to her complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. 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)
3. 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.
  (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. I considered the Council’s Housing Allocations Scheme policy.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X applied to the Council for housing. She said she felt she was eligible for housing under the Council’s housing allocations policy.
8. The Council decided Miss X was not eligible to be placed on the housing register. She asked it to review its decision.
9. The Council did not respond to Miss X’s request for a review. She the complained to the Council about this. It did not respond to her complaint.
10. Miss X complained to the Ombudsman. The Council then completed its review. It upheld the original decision to not place Miss X on its housing register.
11. The review outcome letter has a record of how the Council considered Miss X’s information and circumstances and how it applied its policy. It considered if she qualified under exceptional circumstances and decided she did not. It has explained the reasons for its decision.
12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to place her on its housing register as there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council appears to have considered relevant information, and its decision is in line with its policy. The Ombudsman cannot question or criticise the outcome of a council’s decision provided the council has acted without fault in making this decision.
13. Nor will we investigate Miss X’s complaint the Council delayed completing its review. The Council’s policy says it will usually complete a review within 8 weeks of a request, and Miss X said it took several months to complete her review. However, the Council upheld its original decision not to award housing and so it does not appear any delay there may have been caused Miss X significant injustice. Therefore, we will not investigate here, because there is no significant injustice that would warrant an investigation.
14. Finally, we will not investigate the Council’s handling of Miss X’s complaint. This is because it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint handling, if we cannot deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision and any delays in completing a review have not caused significant enough injustice to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman