Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s decision that his housing transfer application did not qualify him for the Housing Register because it says that he is adequately housed in his current council home. He disagrees with the Council’s decision to dismiss his application and its subsequent review outcome.

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 ust 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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation; 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’s response.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says the Council has not fairly considered his application for a housing transfer. He says the current home he is occupying is too isolated from his family support and services in the city. He wants the Council to reconsider its decision that he does not qualify for the housing register.
6. Mr X asked the Council to review its assessment of his housing application in February this year. He explained in detail why he wants to be moved from his current tenancy. The Council issued its review response in March.
7. The Council told Mr X that he does not qualify for the housing register because he is considered to be adequately housed in his present home which is a 3-bedroomed council property in a suburban area. It says the site is well-served by public transport and there is a bus stop nearby. Following the review the Council told Mr X that his current application will be removed from its system because he does not qualify under its allocations policy.
8. 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.
9. I have read all the correspondence and I can see nothing which indicates that Mr X’s housing application has been given the wrong priority. We may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application or a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme. We recognise that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman