Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application and the suitability of temporary accommodation. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation. The complainant has already requested a review of suitability of her current accommodation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s refusal to give her father’s housing assessment sufficient priority for his health and welfare needs. She says that he is in unsuitable temporary accommodation and that his health is being affected. She wants the Council to allocate medical points as well as homelessness points to his case even though it says that its allocations policy does not permit this.

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, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I have also considered the Council’s housing allocations policy.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X says the Council has refused to give her father’s medical needs sufficient priority on her housing application. His family is in temporary accommodation under the Council’s main housing duty and he asked for a medical assessment to have higher priority on their housing register application. He says the current accommodation is having an effect on his health.
6. The Council told Ms X that her father’s condition will not warrant further points on the application because its allocations policy does not permit applicants accepted under the main housing duty to have medical priority as well. The reasonable preference groups give allocations of points to each group and there is no duplication. If an applicant is in the homeless category they will not qualify for additional points under the health and welfare category to make the system fair to these groups.
7. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application or a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme. We recognise that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas.
8. I have seen no evidence of fault which would suggest that Ms X’s application has not been correctly assessed. The Council has confirmed that Ms X has asked for a review of suitability of the current temporary accommodation. She will have a further right of appeal if she wishes to challenge the outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application and the suitability of temporary accommodation. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation. The complainant has already requested a review of suitability of the current accommodation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman