Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to award band 2 priority on its housing register scheme. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision- making process to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his housing register application. He was awarded band 2 but said he should be in band 1 due to his family’s medical needs and the impact of their current housing on them.

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

What happened

5. Mr X requested medical priority on the Council’s housing register to reflect the medical and disability needs of household members. The Council awarded band 2, after considering the medical evidence provided. It reviewed the application twice, including carrying out a home visit to assess the impact of their current housing in light of the household’s medical and disability needs. After considering all the information provided and its allocation scheme the Council remained satisfied that band 2 was appropriate but did make some adjustments to its assessment of the type of housing the family needs.

My assessment

6. We are not an appeal body. It is not our role to say if the Council’s decisions are correct, nor to substitute our view for that of the Council. We can consider the Council’s decision-making. Unless there was fault in the decision-making process, we cannot comment on the decision reached. The law says all councils must allocate social housing in line with their published scheme.
7. The records seen show the Council has considered the information and medical evidence provided and carried out a home visit to gain a detailed understanding of the family’s housing situation. It has considered its published allocations scheme and has explained in its various decision letters the reasons why band 2 is appropriate and why the application does not meet the criteria for band 1. There was no undue delay in making decisions of carrying out reviews. There is, therefore, insufficient evidence of fault in the decision-making process to justify our involvement. For this reason, we will not consider the complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman