Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint that the Council failed to meet is Equality Act duties in its assessment of her housing application and delayed accepting her need for an additional bedroom. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council failed to meet its duties under the Equality Act whilst assessing her housing application. She says this causing a delay in the Council accepting her need for an additional bedroom and caused her distress. She wants the Council to acknowledge the delay, apologise and improve its service to ensure staff are aware of the Council’s Equality Act duties and that disabled people are not disadvantaged when applying for housing.

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. 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 the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council’s housing allocations policy set outs ins position related to requests for additional bedrooms. It says a request for an additional bedroom may be granted if the Council agrees there is an identified need. It says evidence of the medical, welfare or safety reason for needing an additional bedroom must be provided by the applicant. Each case will be looked at on its own merit.
7. In its complaint response, The Council said information provided with her initial housing application indicated a need for one bedroom, not two. Although in May 2025 she provided additional evidence to support her need for an additional bedroom, the information provided was not clear. It said Ms X provided further evidence in July 2025 which stated her requirements more clearly, and it was on this evidence the Council accepted her need for a second bedroom.
8. It explained how its housing allocations policy ensured those with additional needs were not discriminated against and how the policy ensured decisions were made fairly and consistently, accounting for medical and welfare needs. It said it acknowledged that putting the onus on the applicant to provide supporting evidence for their application did cause an additional pressure, but said this was necessary to ensure its decisions were fair.
9. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council has explained why it did not initially agree to her request for an additional bedroom. Once Ms X provided additional evidence, the Council reviewed its decision and has now agreed to the request. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council considered the matter or reached its decision to warrant an investigation.
10. The Council’s housing allocations policy includes assessment of medical and welfare needs and the Council can allocate additional priority based on identified need. The requirement for evidence to support request for additional housing needs ensures applications are assessed fairly and consistently. There is insufficient evidence that the Council has failed to meet its duties under the Equality Act in its consideration of her application so we will not investigate this.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman