Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to accept Miss X’s application to the housing register. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council ‘s refusal to accept her housing application to its housing register. She says she is homeless because she has no access to her accommodation due to a threat of violence form a former partner.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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

3. I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council’s response. I have also considered the Council’s housing allocations policy.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X says she is unable to return to her home because of fear of violence form a former partner. She wants to be added to the housing register so that she can bid on social housing vacancies. The Council told her that she does not qualify for the housing register because she does not meet the 7-year residency qualification. She asked for the decision to be reviewed and the Council’s review upheld the original decision.
6. The Council told Miss X that if she has no access to accommodation, she should make a homeless application because the housing register could not provide for her urgent accommodation needs, even if she had met the policy criteria on residence. At present applicants are waiting several years on the housing register for vacancies.
7. Miss X says she does not wish to complete a homeless application because it may involve being moved further away or even outside the district which would affect her job and contacts.
8. The Council has a duty to provide accommodation for persons who have no accommodation if they are eligible under the Housing Act 1996 Part 7 provisions. Any applicant may be placed in interim or temporary accommodation outside the area when there is a shortage but this is not fault. There is no reason to believe Miss X would be treated differently to any other homeless applicant in similar circumstances.
9. 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.
10. In this case Miss X does not meet the requirements of the allocations policy to be accepted onto the housing register and a homeless application would be the appropriate course of action to pursue.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to accept Miss X’s application to the housing register. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman