Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s offer of housing association accommodation made to the complainant in 2019. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner. We will not investigate the Council’s assessment of her housing application. The Council has reviewed the decision on her case and there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council offering her a housing association tenancy in 2019 when she was homeless which she says is unsuitable for her needs. She says she struggles with stairs and was led to believe there was a lift to her second-floor flat when there are only stairs. She also complained about the Council’s rejection of her housing application because it says she does not meet the threshold for being included on the list.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council. I have also considered the Council’s housing allocations policy.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X says she accepted an offer of a housing association flat in 2019 when she was a homelessness applicant for whom the Council had accepted the homeless duty. She says that she was led to believe the flat had lift access but it has not and her medical conditions mean that she struggles accessing the stairs to the flat.
7. We will not investigate this part of the complaint because the offer was made in 2019 and she did not complain to us until 2025 which is outside the normal 12-month period for accepting complaints.
8. The time for receiving complaints is from when someone became aware of the matter they wish to complain about, not when they complained to the Council or it issued its final response. We would expect someone to complain to us within a year, even if they were dissatisfied with the time the complaints procedure was taking.
9. Miss X says she submitted a housing application to move from her home and it was rejected by the Council in 2022. In 2024 she asked for a review and received a response from the Council under s.166A of the housing Act 1996 part 6. The Council concluded that Miss X did not meet the level of overcrowding to make her eligible for the register on these grounds. She is lacking one bedroom but the allocations policy does not consider this lack to make someone eligible for the register due to the high demand from other applicants in the same circumstances.
10. Miss X provided medical evidence of her physical conditions and stated that the difficulty with her current home was affecting her mental health. The Council did not award medical priority because it says she has not sufficient medical evidence that she cannot manage stairs. It said her mental health issues did not meet the threshold where it could award priority on the grounds that a move was essential.
11. 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. I can see no evidence that the Council’s review failed to consider Miss X’s properly.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s offer of housing association accommodation made to the complainant in 2019. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner. We will not investigate the Council’s assessment of her housing application. The Council has reviewed the decision on her case and there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman