Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about housing allocations because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complained the Council has refused to agree to make her a direct offer of accommodation due to her needs for a larger and disability friendly property.
2. Miss Y says she has previously been allocated properties directly and her existing property is overcrowded with her adult son sharing a bed with her younger daughter. She says the overcrowding is causing her and her children upset and discomfort.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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)
4. 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

5. I considered information Miss Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss Y has complained that the Council has refused to make a direct let offer to her, as it has done previously, to resolve her overcrowding on the basis of her need for an adapted property due to her disabilities and physical needs. Miss Y says she is overcrowded as her two children, one of whom is an adult, are currently sharing a bed, while she sleeps in the living room of their one bed property. The Council has accepted this, and she has been placed in Band 3 due to the overcrowding issue under the Council’s housing allocations policy.
7. The Council considered Miss Y’s request for a direct let offer, where the Council offers a specific property to an individual which it believes will meet their needs. Such offers are discretionary and are where there may be issues with a person bidding under the usual scheme for housing allocations.
8. Under the Council’s housing allocations policy, it gives examples of circumstances where it will consider making a direct let offer. Miss Y’s circumstances are not included in this list, but as it is not exhaustive, as specified in the policy, the Council would have discretion on whether or not to make such an offer outside of those criteria.
9. In this case, the Council’s complaint response explains that while it did previously make a direct let offer to Miss Y for the property she currently lives in, this was under a different set of circumstances, specifically that she was, at that time, homeless and had exceptional circumstances.
10. The Council explained that as she was adequately housed on this occasion, where previously she was not, it would not make a direct let offer to her. It said that Miss Y needed to bid on properties.
11. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. In this case, the Council considered Miss Y’s request and has been able to explain its rationale with reference to her circumstances, both previously and currently, to say why it has rejected her request for a direct letting offer.
12. While Miss Y may disagree with this, as the Council has had regard to her circumstances and its policy and has considered its discretion, there is not enough evidence of fault in the decision-making process to justify investigation. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman