Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered Miss X’s housing priority. There is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained that the Council:

• Awarded the wrong priority band to her when it moved her housing application to its new housing allocations scheme.
• Failed to place her in the correct band after it discovered the error.
• Entered the wrong address for her on its computer system.

2. Miss X considers that, as a result, she and her child are living in unsuitable accommodation for longer than necessary which has caused significant distress to her.

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)
4. 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, any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X is on the Council’s housing register as she considers her property is unsuitable for her and her child’s medical needs. In April 2025, the Council introduced a new housing allocations scheme which increased the number of priority bands. Under the previous scheme the Council placed Miss X in band C as it considered she had moderate medical need. Under 2025 scheme, the Council placed applicants with band C priority in bands 11 or 12 depending on whether the applicant had 10 years continuous residency in the Council’s area. The Council placed Miss X in band 13.
8. Miss X asked the Council to check her priority band. The Council checked the priority band and discovered that it had wrongly placed Miss X in band 13. It considered Miss X should be placed in band 12. It did not place her in band 11 as Miss X had not lived in the Council’s area continuously for 10 years.
9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that the Council placed her in the incorrect priority band. Miss X’s bids on properties since she was placed in band 12 did not have sufficient ranking to be shortlisted for a property. Miss X therefore did not miss an offer of a property during the three months she was wrongly placed in a lower priority band. So, there is insufficient evidence of injustice to justify an investigation of this aspect of Miss X’s complaint.
10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that the Council wrongly placed her in band 12. This is the correct priority band for applicants who were awarded band C under the previous housing allocations scheme and who do not have 10 years continuous residency in the Council’s area. The Council also reviewed Miss X’s priority when it considered her complaint. So, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation of this aspect of her complaint.
11. Miss X advised the Council that it had wrongly recorded her address. In response to Miss X’s complaint, the Council confirmed it had corrected her address on its records. We will not investigate this aspect of Miss X’s complaint. We are mindful that the Council’s incorrect recording of Miss X’s address will have caused some frustration to her. But this is not sufficient injustice to justify an investigation of the complaint. The Council has corrected its records so an investigation would not achieve any more for Miss X.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint as there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman