Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on a housing application because it is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council:
• Had failed to provide suitable housing for her and her son since 2023.
• Failed to make suitable offers of housing.
• Failed to reply to a subject access request.
• Handled her complaints poorly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

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 Ms X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms X contacted us on 20 August 2025, so any complaint about matters arising before 20 August 2024 is late.
8. The Council maintains decisions it made in 2023, that Ms X needs a two bedroom wheelchair accessible property. That it has repeated its stance more recently does not bring the complaint about the Council’s 2023 decision in time. The complaint is late. And there is no good reason why Ms X could not have contacted us sooner. Therefore, I will not investigate.
9. Any delay in the Council’s complaint handling did not prevent Ms X from contacting us sooner.
10. Ms X says the injustice arising from the 2023 decision is continuing. This would allow us to look at events in the 12 months before she contacted us, however there have been no new events or decisions on this point.
11. Ms X complains about derogatory remarks made by the Council in a letter of July 2024. This complaint is also late. And there is no good reason why Ms X could not have contacted us sooner. Therefore, I will not investigate.
12. In September 2024 the Council decided a property either on the ground floor or on another floor where lift access is available would be suitable for Ms X. However, Ms X says she needs a ground floor property only. This complaint is in time. However, I will not investigate as this would not achieve anything more. This is because the Council will seek a formal assessment by an occupational therapist to confirm the suitability of any property before finalising any offer. Therefore it will make a new decision based on the facts at the time. And it will be open to Ms X to challenge any such decision if she wishes.
13. Ms X is unhappy with the Council’s property offers, at least one of which appears to have been made in the 12 months before she contacted us and so is in time. While it is frustrating to be offered properties that later turn out to be unsuitable, this does not cause significant enough injustice to warrant investigation. This is because Ms X does not have to accept the properties offered and because the Council has confirmed it will also seek a formal assessment by an occupational therapist to confirm the suitability of any property before finalising any offer.
14. It remains open to Ms X to bid on properties. That she has not moved to a new property does not amount to fault by the Council. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
15. The Council’s policy is to allow 48 hours for a response to a direct offer. Where the Council has followed its policy there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
16. The Council’s housing allocations policy makes clear its housing register is for those seeking housing in Brent. It is not for those seeking housing outside of the borough. The Council explained to Ms X it had not stopped her from bidding on properties outside of the borough but she would not be prioritised for those listings. Where the Council has followed its policy there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
17. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to address complaints that the Council has failed to reply to a Subject Access Request.
18. It is not proportionate to consider complaints about the Council’s complaint handling when we are not investigating the substantive issue.
19. For completeness, I cannot see any separable complaints giving rise to fault under the Equality Act, Care Act, Housing Act, Children Acts, Human Rights Act, or GDPR that have not already been covered above.
20. If Ms X has new evidence to support a reassessment of her housing needs she should provide this to the Council for it to consider. We have only considered the complaint up to the date of the Council’s final complaint response of August 2025.

Back to top

Final decision

21. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it is late.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman