London Borough of Camden (24 023 005)

Category : Housing > Allocations

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 13 Oct 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

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. Miss X complained about the Council’s assessment of her housing application. She says she should have been awarded medical priority for ground floor and larger accommodation but the Council has rejected her requests in two reviews of her case.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council’s responses. I have also considered the Council’s housing allocations policy.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Miss X says her current studio flat is too small and that she needs to transfer to ground floor one-bedroomed accommodation urgently. She says she has medical conditions which require more space and that her mother sometimes needs to stay over as Ms X is her carer.
  2. The Council carried out a review of her case and considered the medical evidence she provided. It’s medical assessor decided that she does not meet the threshold for additional priority. Miss X made a complaint about the outcome and the Council carried out a further review of the information which she provided to support the application. The review upheld the original decision that she did not warrant higher priority on medical grounds.
  3. 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.
  4. We may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application/ 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. I have seen no evidence of fault which would suggest that Miss X’s application should be placed in a higher priority banding.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. 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

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings