Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing Miss X’s application to join its housing register. This is mainly because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council wrongly refused her application to join its housing register. She also says the Council passed her application to other councils without considering her safety. Miss X says this means she does not have a chance of getting social housing near relatives who help her and her children, who have disabilities.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. 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; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).

3. 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

4. I considered information provided by Miss X and relevant law and policy.
5. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X lives outside the Council’s area. She applied to join the Council’s housing register. The Council refused the application, saying Miss X:
• did not have a local connection to the area, and
• was already adequately housed.

Miss X later made another application, which the Council passed on to other councils for consideration, based on the addresses of her family connections.

7. Each council can decide for itself which applicants to accept on its housing register. Different councils can have different rules. The Council’s housing allocation policy states applicants can only join its housing register if (amongst other things) they have a ‘local connection’ and are not already adequately housed.
8. The policy defines a ‘local connection’ as having a mother, father, brother, sister, adult child or grandparent living in the Council’s area. Miss X does not have any such connection. Miss X said an aunt lives in the Council’s area. However, the Council said the aunt does not live in its area. I have checked and the aunt’s address Miss X gave is not in the Council’s area. Moreover, an aunt is not one of the relatives listed in the Council’s policy, so would not have given Miss X the required ‘local connection.’
9. The Council also recognised it could use its discretion to depart from its normal policy in exceptional circumstances. It explained it did not consider Miss X’s circumstances warranted that.
10. The Council properly reached its decisions on these points. Where there is no fault in the decision-making process, we cannot question the outcome, as paragraph 3 explained.
11. Miss X disagreed with the Council’s view that she was adequately housed. However, whether or not the Council assessed this correctly, it would not have changed Miss X’s position. Miss X would still not have qualified to join the housing register because she did not have a local connection. Therefore, this point did not cause Miss X significant enough injustice to warrant us investigating whether the Council was at fault.
12. Miss X also raised concerns about the Council passing her application to other nearby councils. She states she does not want housing in those areas because she would be unsafe. The Council has apologised and changed its procedures to prevent a recurrence. I consider this is an appropriate remedy for any upset and frustration caused. I do not believe that further investigation by us would achieve a better or significantly different result.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s refusal of the housing application to justify us investigating. Further, the Council’s decision that Miss X was adequately housed did not in itself cause significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman