Dartford Borough Council (25 013 360)

Category : Housing > Allocations

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 20 Apr 2026

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not doing a housing register review. Parts of the complaint are late without good reason, and in the rest, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

  1. Miss X complains the Council has refused to do a “fairness-based review” of her position on the housing register. Ms X says the Council’s decision means her family is living in overcrowded housing, and she wants the Council to review her housing register banding.
  2. Miss X also complains about errors and delay in the Council’s complaint handling.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Mrs X.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mrs X has been on the housing register for ten years. In September 2018 the Council sent Mrs X information about the evidence required to confirm her eligibility for Band B priority, including because of a ‘community contribution’ in line with its policy. Mrs X provided some evidence, and the Council allocated her Band B.
  2. In 2019, Mrs X went from work into higher education and no longer qualified for Band B for a ‘community contribution’. The Council moved Mrs X to band C, but Mrs X now says it should not have done so as she was volunteering while in higher education so still made a community contribution. In 2023, the Council moved Mrs X back to Band B when her circumstances changed and she became eligible again. The Council says it told her each time of its decision, and when.
  3. Mrs X only complained to us in 2025, but we have seen nothing to suggest she did not know in 2018 about the need for evidence of eligibility for band B, or about the Council’s banding decisions in 2019 and 2023. I see no reason Mrs X could not have complained sooner. So, the restriction in paragraph four applies and we will not investigate this part of the complaint.
  4. Mrs X requested the Council requested the Council reconsider her housing application on the basis the period between 2016 and 2019 should count towards her time spent in band B. This is because it affects her priority against other applicants for the same accommodation under the choice-based lettings scheme in the area.
  5. The Council has reviewed Mrs X’s application three times and explained to Mrs X why it has not changed its decision. There is no provision in Council policy for a specific ‘fairness-based review as she has asked, as the policy and we would expect all reviews to be fair. But that also means not being unfair to other people as well as the applicant. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to justify investigation.
  6. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we decide not to investigate the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because parts of the complaint are late without good reason. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s recent actions or responses to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings