Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about support for rehousing because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained his social worker and local housing office have not supported him with his request for rehousing. He also disagrees with the priority band awarded on the Council’s housing register. Mr X says this means he remains in housing that is not suitable for him.

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.

(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 Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Help with bidding

5. The Council accepted Mr X’s housing register application in 2023. It says he made regular bids for properties until February 2024 and has not made any bids since August 2024.
6. Mr X is a Council tenant and asked his housing officer to help him with bidding. The Council said his housing officer had given advice about housing options, such as mutual exchange, and liaised with Mr X’s social worker. The housing officer had explained to Mr X that assisting him with bidding was not part of their remit but they explained to Mr X where he can get help with placing bids.
7. The Council also offered to refer Mr X for help from an external organisation that had supported but X before, but Mr X has not given it specific consent to make that referral.
8. The Council has also considered auto bidding but this would not help Mr X because he wants a property in a very specific location and auto bidding would not recognise his preferences.
9. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify further investigation. The Council has explained to Mr X how he can get help with bidding.

Priority band

10. Following an assessment in March 2024, the Council awarded band B priority to reflect the impact of his housing on his physical and mental health. Mr X understood there would be further assessments every six months, which had not happened. In its complaint response, the Council said further assessments would only be done if there was a significant change in circumstances. However, it agreed to carry out a fresh assessment if Mr X gave it consent to contact his social worker for information, which Mr X did not do. It also said he could provide medical evidence directly to the reviewing officer if he could not upload it through its housing Portal.
11. Since the complaint response, the Council considered Mr X’s priority again. It decided he was adequately housed, and no further priority would be awarded. On review, the Council explained band B priority reflected the impact of Mr X’s current housing on his medical conditions. It explained why the criteria for band A was not met.
12. We are not an appeal body. Unless we find fault in the decision-making process, we cannot comment on the decision reached. The law says councils must allocate social housing in line with its published allocations scheme.
13. The Council considered all the information it had and its allocations scheme. It explained its reasons for deciding band B was appropriate and the criteria for band A was not met. It made its decision without undue delay. There is, therefore, insufficient evidence of fault in decision-making process to justify further investigation.

Social worker support

14. Mr X also said his social worker was not supporting him with his rehousing and he has had some difficulty contacting them. In its complaint response, the Council said Mr X had been meeting with his social worker every two weeks. As part of that, the social worker had discussed his housing options. However, since the housing team had decided he was adequately housed, there was little more the social worker could achieve. The social worker had also provided a list of contacts for Mr X to use when he needed support in relation to various matters.
15. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to investigate this further.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman