Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about housing allocations because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has removed him from the housing register twice without legal reason and has reduced his housing allocation needs from a one-bedroom flat to a studio requirement and has placed him lower on the housing register list.
2. Mr Y says his energy has been wasted, he has been caused distress and inconvenience, and he feels he has lost the chance to get into permanent social housing after ten years on the housing register.

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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information Mr Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr Y says he has been on the housing register for approximately ten years. His application was originally for him and his mother. However, in October 2024 Mr Y updated the Council following a change of circumstances. This led to his mother being removed from the application.
6. Under the Council’s processes, when informed of a change of circumstances, it had to reconsider Mr Y’s application for the housing register. Mr Y was at that time living in a one-bedroom property which he privately rented. As a sole applicant, the Council found that Mr Y was now adequately housing in his existing accommodation. It therefore did not consider him an eligible person to be on the housing register under its housing allocations scheme as he did not have a housing need. It wrote to Mr Y to explain this.
7. Mr Y then reapplied to join the housing register in April 2025. The Council again found that Mr Y did not qualify to join the housing register as he was already living in suitable accommodation; a one-bedroom property.
8. Mr Y has since had an application to join the housing register accepted, following a further change of circumstances which led Mr Y to make a homelessness application to the Council.
9. Mr Y has complained that the Council removed him from its housing register on two occasions without a suitable cause. Under the Council’s housing allocations scheme, it a person making an application to the register to be both eligible and a qualifying person. If a Council believes a person does not have a housing need, they will not be a qualifying person. Under the Council’s housing allocations scheme, where a person is adequately housed, they will not have a housing need and therefore cannot join the housing register.
10. In this case, the Council has applied Mr Y’s change of circumstances to his original and more recent application and has therefore, as it is able to under its policy, removed his application from the register. As this is in accordance with its policy, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation into this complaint.
11. Mr Y has also complained the Council has reduced his housing allocation needs from a one-bedroom flat to a studio requirement. Under the Council’s allocations scheme it explains the size of accommodation would be allocated based on the number of bedrooms required. When Mr Y’s application included his mother, he was assessed as needing two bedrooms in any property he was allocated. However, as a sole applicant, the Council’s policy says he would be considered as requiring self-contained studio flat although he may be offered either a studio flat or a one-bedroom accommodation.
12. Consequently, the Council has not decided that Mr Y will not be allocated a one-bedroomed property, and it is possible that when he is allocated accommodation, this may be a one-bedroomed flat. However, under the Council’s housing allocations scheme, if he is allocated a studio-flat, this would not be fault as the Council would be within the criteria set out in its policy. Therefore, there is not enough evidence of fault in this complaint to justify investigation.
13. Mr Y is also unhappy the Council has placed him lower on the housing register list than it had previously, particularly when his application included his mother. When his application was reassessed after he told the Council of the change of circumstances form, this will have altered his priority on the register. This is in line with the Council’s allocations policy as Mr Y will have had his priority altered to reflect his housing needs and situation. As the Council’s policy allows for this, there is not enough evidence to fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman