Summary: We have upheld Mrs X’s complaint because the Council failed to consider Mrs X’s change of circumstances and delayed reviewing her housing banding. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mrs X.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council declined to review her housing banding, saying it had already carried out a review and her circumstances had not changed. She says her circumstances had in fact changed and the Council failed to properly consider this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X asked the Council to review her housing banding and provided evidence of a change in her circumstances following a review in 2024.
6. The Council initially declined to carry out a review, stating it did not consider her circumstances had changed.
7. The Council has since reconsidered Mrs X’s case and identified there has been a delay in reviewing her request and her change of circumstances may not have been properly taken into account.
8. The Council apologised and agreed to reassess her housing application
9. If we investigated this complaint, it is likely we would find the Council at fault, because the Council should have arranged a review of Mrs X’s housing banding. The Council’s actions have remedied any injustice that this caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman