Westminster City Council (25 011 820)
Category : Housing > Allocations
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 19 Dec 2025
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
- Mr X complained about the Council’s assessment of his housing application. He says that he provided medical evidence for a review of his case but the Council rejected his request for medical priority.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council’s response. I have also considered the Council’s housing allocations policy.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Mr X says the Council failed to give his housing application medical priority even though he sent in detailed evidence of his health issues and treatment. The Council told him that although it accepted that he had medical needs, they did not meet the threshold for medical priority under its allocations policy. It says the medical needs must relate to his existing accommodation and in this case the evidence was not enough to warrant a higher banding.
- Mr X asked the Council to review his case and it did so under s.166A of the Housing Act 1996. The outcome was that his medical request was unsuccessful. There is no further appeal against a review outcome.
- The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
- 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.
Final decision
- We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman