Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the priority given to a housing application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains that the Council did not properly consider the medical evidence she submitted and it refused to change her housing banding.
2. She also complains that the Council refused to meet with her in person to go through her documents. Ms X said the Council refused to escalate her case to stage two of its complaints procedure.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X says the Council refuses to change her housing banding. She also says the Council failed to consider the new medical information she submitted. Ms X explained she should be treated as priority because her current accommodation is impacting her child’s health and wellbeing.
7. The Council explained to Ms X that the information she submitted is not enough to change her banding. It said that if her circumstances change, she can submit new information and if that new information is relevant, it will carry out another review.
8. Where the Council has made a decision properly, we cannot question the merits or outcome because we are not an appeal body. I have not found enough evidence of fault to question the merits or outcome of the Council’s banding decision in Ms X’s case.
9. Ms X said the Council refused to meet with her face to face and go through her documents. I have not found enough evidence of fault with the Council’s decision to not hold a meeting. This is because the Council is not required to hold a meeting under its Allocations policy. It would be at the discretion of the Council to hold a meeting with Ms X.
10. Ms X says the Council refused to consider her case under its Corporate Complaints Procedure. However, I note the Council have already explained to Ms X that there is a separate appeal process for banding decisions.
11. The Council’s Corporate Complaints Policy and Procedure says that complaints where other appeal mechanisms are available generally fall outside its Corporate Complaints Policy and Procedure. I have therefore not found enough evidence of fault with the Council’s decision to consider Ms X’s case as an appeal, rather than as a complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault with the Council’s actions to justify a further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman