Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision about her priority for social housing. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making about medical priority to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed properly to consider the medical information she provided and the impact of overcrowding when assessing her application for social housing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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.

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

3. 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 the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X asked the Council to consider whether her circumstances meant she qualified for medical priority on its housing register.
7. The Council assessed her application, sought advice from its medical adviser and considered the evidence Mrs X provided. The Council decided Mrs X’s circumstances did result in medical priority and awarded Band C priority.
8. Mrs X sought a review of this decision. She said the impact of her housing on her health was significant and she should be in the higher Band B priority. The Council completed the review and decided Mrs X remained in Band C.
9. We are not an appeal body. This means it is not for us to decide whether the Council made the right decision. We look at how the Council made its decision, what it considered and how it applied law and policy. If there was no fault in how it made its decision, we cannot question the outcome.
10. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council considered the evidence and its allocations policy and reached a decision open to it. It explained its reasons to Mrs X. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making to justify investigating.
11. Mrs X’s family is also overcrowded. We will not investigate whether the Council properly considered the overcrowding separately from the impact on Mrs X’s health. This is because although overcrowding attracts its own priority, the extent of Mrs X’s overcrowding would result in Band C anyway. There is, therefore, not enough injustice to Mrs X from any fault by the Council to justify investigating this further.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman