Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s lack of response to Mr X’s complaint about his unsuitable housing. This is because we could not add to the investigation already carried out by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about not receiving a response, at the second stage of the Council’s complaint procedure, to his complaint about unsuitable housing.
2. Mr X says this has caused distress and anxiety for his whole family. He would like a response urgently, action on his housing situation and an apology.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organization, and
• there is another body better placed to consider.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint at stage two of its complaints procedure after he had complained to the Ombudsman.
7. The Council’s response apologised for its delay saying this was due to its backlog of cases. It said it had reviewed his complaint but had not found reasons to depart from the conclusions set out in its earlier responses sent in October and November 2024.
8. These earlier responses noted Mr X and his family’s 13 year wait on the Council’s Housing register but advised most of their properties were being allocated to applicants with Band A or Band B status. It noted Mr X’s Band C status, his severe overcrowding and need for 4 bedroomed accommodations. It advised his best chance of securing suitable housing was via the private sector. The Council added it would consider any new information from Mr X that could affect his housing application.
9. We will not investigate the delayed response to Mr X’s complaint as the Council has now sent him a response, apologised and explained the reasons for the delay. This is satisfactory and further investigation would not achieve or add anything more.
10. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme. Mr X has not complained the Council has placed him in the incorrect priority band. Rather, he complains about the time he has spent on the register. But this is not due to any fault by the Council but due to the demand for social housing far outstripping the supply of properties in London. If Mr X considers his application merits Band A or Band B priority he should send his reasons why to the Council.
11. Finally, Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to answer his specific questions concerning the number of households it has accommodated into permanent housing. I note he made his request under the Freedom of Information Act. We will not investigate as the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider as the regulator for information rights.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman