Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the banding priority the Council has given her housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, an investigation would not lead to any more outcomes.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the banding priority the Council has given her housing application. She says she should be in a higher band because her accommodation is unsuitable for her needs.

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.

(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. Miss X applied to join the Council’s housing register in November 2024. The Council sent Miss X’s medical evidence to its medical advisor to consider in December 2024.
6. The medical advisor considered the medical evidence and noted that stairs would be hard for Miss X to traverse and so priority applied on that basis. The recommendation was for medical priority Band 3.
7. The Council sent Miss X’s medical evidence to be assessed again by its medical advisor in March 2025. Again, the medical advisor’s recommendation was for medical priority Band 3 due to difficulty around Miss X managing the stairs.
8. The Council confirmed it had since reconsidered the matter and decided to award Miss X a higher band. This is due to reflection on the risk posed to Miss X and the impact her current accommodation is having on her health, both physically and mentally. The Council has now awarded her Band 1 priority, with an effective date of March 2025.
9. An investigation is not justified as we are not likely to find fault. The Council has appropriately reconsidered and decided to award a higher priority band than recommended by its medical advisor. We are not likely to find fault with the Council for not awarding Band 1 earlier as it had previously been following the recommendation of its medical advisor. The Council is allowed to exercise discretion when it considers it appropriate to do so. We could not say the Council should have exercised its discretion earlier.
10. As the Council has now awarded Miss X the higher priority band, an investigation is also not proportionate as there is nothing more we could achieve.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman