Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council's assessment of his housing priority and his concerns of wider maladministration in its housing allocation scheme. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has refused to allocate him urgent priority on the housing register. He also complains the Council has treated other housing applicants more favourably than him, and other applicants are being allocated properties based on fraudulent information. He says the Council’s actions have led to him missing out on suitable properties. He wants the Council to allocate him urgent priority and offer him a suitable property.

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. Mr X has been on the Council’s housing register awaiting allocation of a larger property since 2023. In 2024, he asked the Council to review his housing priority band. The Council reviewed his banding and in February 2025 increased his application to high priority. It backdated the increase to December 2024, as it says this when Mr X provided sufficient information to warrant a high priority award. It reviewed bids that Mr X had placed between December 2024 and February 2025 and said it was satisfied that Mr X had not missed out on an offer of a property due to the delay applying the increased priority.
7. We will not investigate this part of the complaint. The Council appropriately reviewed Mr X’s housing priority when requested and increased his priority based on the evidence Mr X provided. The Council’s decision appears in line with its housing allocations policy. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
8. Mr X also complains that other housing applicants have been treated more favourably than him and their applications prioritised over his. We will not investigate this. Mr X is not privy to the details of other applications or know how the Council has assessed and reached decisions in other cases. If he considers he has evidence that other applicants are acting fraudulently in their applications, it is open to him to raise these concerns with the Council. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council has handled Mr X’s application and review request or of any wider fault in the Council’s administration of its housing scheme to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr 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