Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about housing allocations. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council determined her housing priority banding which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council did not assess her as having a priority need for the housing register.

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 the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X currently lives with her child in a three-bedroom property. Miss X finds her current property unaffordable and feels it is too far from her support network. Miss X applied to the housing register and was awarded a general needs band.
6. Miss X complains she has not been assessed as having a priority need.
7. The Council have assessed Miss X’s current property as affordable for her. They have also determined her support network is accessible because they are within 30-minutes travel time. The Council have also assessed Miss X on welfare grounds but have not been provided with medical evidence that supports a priority need. The Council explained to Miss X what evidence would be needed to reassess the application under welfare grounds in the future.
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. The Ombudsman 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.
10. There is insufficient evidence of fault suggesting Miss X should be placed in a higher banding. It is open to Miss X to provide further medical evidence to the Council and ask for reassessment.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council determined her housing priority banding which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman