Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council assessed a housing register application. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council refused her application to the housing register and did not consider all her circumstances. Mrs X stated this has caused her anxiety and had a negative impact upon her physical health. She wanted the Council to allow her access to the housing register so she could bid for affordable housing for her and her children.

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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X applied to the Council for housing in 2023 when she owned her home. In 2024 she sold her home and re-applied to the housing register.
6. Mrs X provided evidence to the Council which it decided showed Mrs X had worsened her own financial circumstances.
7. The Council’s Allocations Policy states applicants with savings of more than £16,000 are ineligible to join the housing register. It also states applicants who have deliberately made their situation worse to increase their housing need are ineligible.
8. Mrs X complained to the Council about its decision she was ineligible to join the housing register. She provided further information about the situation that led to her financial circumstances having worsened.
9. The Council responded to Mrs X. It detailed their meetings and correspondence and reviewed her applications to the housing register. The review concluded
   Mrs X was not eligible to join the housing register. The Council still decided she had deliberately worsened her own circumstances.
10. 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 process 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.
11. We cannot find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application if it has carried out this in line with its published allocations scheme. The Council assessed Mrs X’s housing application in line with its housing allocations policy. We cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X seeks.
12. When the Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint, it accepted fault in how it had communicated with her. It apologised for this and explained the service improvements it would make as a result. If we investigated this complaint, it is unlikely we would achieve a different or more meaningful outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman