Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Ms X’s housing register application as it has provided a proportionate remedy. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation of Ms X’s complaints about the Council refusing to nominate her to a property and how it dealt with her homelessness application. We will not investigate how the Council considered Ms X's safeguarding concerns as an investigation will not achieve a worthwhile outcome for her.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained that the Council:

• Delayed in applying priority band C to her housing application and failed to notify her of the award.
• Unfairly refused to nominate her for a property.
• Breached its duties under the Care Act 2014 to safeguard Ms X when she told the Council about the significant distress she was experiencing.
• Failed to properly deal with her homelessness application.

2. Ms X says that the Council’s mishandling of her housing register, homelessness application and safeguarding concerns caused significant distress to her and contributed to her mental health crisis.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

4. 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)
5. 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

6. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Ms X qualified for the Council’s housing register in July 2023 and requested a review of her medical priority. In December 2023, the Council awarded band C medical priority. But it did not apply the priority band to Ms X’s application, and it did not notify Ms X of the award.
9. In 2025, Ms X complained to the Council about the delay in considering her medical priority. The Council considered the complaint through its two stage complaints procedure. It acknowledged its delay in applying band C to her application and failure to notify her of its decision. The Council applied band C to Ms X’s application and backdated the award to December 2022.
10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint as the Council provided a proportionate remedy. Our remedies aim to put the person back in the position they would have been if the fault had not occurred. The Council backdated the start of band C priority to December 2022. This more than puts Ms X back in the position she would have been in if the Council had applied the band C priority in December 2023 as it should have done.
11. The Council said Ms X only bid on one property between December 2023 and June 2025. The applicant nominated for the property had higher priority than Ms X would have done if the Council had applied her band C priority in December 2023. So, Ms X did not miss the opportunity to be nominated for a property due to the fault. The Council therefore provided an appropriate and proportionate remedy for Ms X’s injustice.
12. When making her complaint, Ms X asked the Council to nominate her to a particular property. The Council refused to nominate her as her bidding position was lower than the successful applicant. Ms X did not have sufficient priority for the property even with her backdated priority. We will not investigate this complaint as there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation. The Council must follow its housing allocations policy and nominate applicants according to their priority.
13. The Council increased Ms X’s priority to band B in July 2025. Ms X considers the Council should have reconsidered nominating her to the particular property when it increased her priority. We will not investigate this complaint as it is a new issue which arose after the Council considered Ms X’s complaint. Ms X should make this complaint to the Council. She may be able to make a new complaint to the Ombudsman after the Council completes its consideration through its complaints procedure.
14. We will not investigate Ms X’s about how the Council considered her safeguarding concerns arising from the delay in applying band C. Even if the Council should have made a safeguarding referral to Adult Social Care, we cannot know, even on balance, what the outcome would have been. An investigation would therefore not achieve anything for Ms X.
15. Ms X considers the Council did not provide sufficient support when she made her homelessness application in 2024. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council’s responses to Ms X’s complaint show it took action to prevent Ms X’s homelessness. So, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation of this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about her housing register application as the Council provided a proportionate remedy. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation of Ms X’s complaints about the Council refusing to nominate her to a property and how it dealt with her homelessness application. We will not investigate how the Council considered Ms X's safeguarding concerns as an investigation will not achieve a worthwhile outcome for her.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman