Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council has dealt with her housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that the Council has not properly considered her housing application. She says the Council failed to recognise that her father lives with her to provide care and that her nephew also lives with her. She says the Council also failed to recognise her and her son’s medical needs.

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))
3. 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)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. At the time of Miss X’s complaint to the Council, she lived in a one-bedroom property with her child, nephew and father. The Council accepted her onto its housing register at Band D for a two-bedroom property.
8. The Council concluded that there was insufficient evidence that Miss X’s father was providing full time care to her and that Miss X’s nephew was not dependent on her and that she did not have legal guardianship over him.
9. The Council considered medical evidence provided by Miss X in relation to her and her son’s health. It concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support a change to her banding on medical grounds. It noted that there was an issue of damp at the property, but that Miss X had refused the housing association additional access to try and resolve this issue.
10. I will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. 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. I have seen no evidence of fault which would suggest that the Council did not properly consider Miss X’s complaint.
11. Since the Council issued a final response in July 2025, Miss X has given birth, and Adult Social Care has carried out assessments. I will not investigate the Council’s actions since July 2025 because Miss X will first need to raise any complaints she has about subsequent matters with the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman