Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s housing register application because there is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of her housing allocation application. She is seeking a suitable 4 bedroom home for her family. She says her son has a disability,his condition is severe and he urgently needs step-free housing as he cannot manage stairs and often requires emergency hospital care.
   
   She’s asking that the Council only offer properties that meet her son’s medical and mobility needs.

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 investigation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the Complainant and the Council. I have also considered the Council’s housing allocations policy.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X complained to the Council about poor record-keeping of her housing register application on 26 June 2025. In August 2024, Ms X’s housing register suspension was reviewed and overturned by a Council officer. However, this information was never properly updated on their system. Furthermore, upon her MP contacting the Council on her behalf, to clarify her housing situation her MP was informed that Ms X’s housing application was still suspended for a year.
6. Ms X believes that this is the main reason why she has not been shortlisted for any properties since last year, despite her urgent circumstances. Her application is currently listed for both three- and four-bedroom properties; and she is currently in band 2. She was unhappy with the 1st stage review which she states does not address her actual complaint: “her application may have been suspended on the system preventing me from being shortlisted” and so she raised a 2nd stage review.
7. The Council responded that the wording in the Members Enquiry should have been clearer, and an apology was issued. However, no inaccuracies could be identified in the housing register application and it says she was notified herself that the suspension had been lifted at the time. It also advised her that for applicants in band 2, the average waiting time for 4-bedroom properties is between eight to ten years.
8. The Council acknowledged that Ms X is trying to secure a four-bedroom home and that she is willing to wait for a new build property, which are being built near her children’s school. They advise her that the allocation of social housing is completed in strict accordance with the Council’s Housing Allocations Policy, which is based on the priority band and then the effective date of an application. The Council can offer no guarantee that she will be offered a new build property as there are many applicants on the housing register.
9. It also advised that there are no specific housing requirements logged for her son, and the Council signposted her to The Housing Allocations Policy, which sets out that unless there are exceptional circumstances, such as an individual having a medical necessity for 24 hour care, then at the age of 21, they no longer have the automatic right to remain on their parents housing register application and this birthday triggers a reassessment of the application. This is due to the fact that Ms X had raised the issue to the Council that her son will soon be 21 years old and raised the issue of him securing his own tenancy and provided an overview of his needs.
10. The Council responded, advising that an assessment of need was the most appropriate way to establish if he is able to remain on her application or if he should make an application in his own name. The Council is still awaiting supporting medical evidence from relevant professionals /organisations in order to complete this assessment.

My assessment

11. We are not an appeal body. It is not our role to say whether the Council’s decision was correct. Unless there was a fault in the Council’s decision-making process, we cannot comment on the decision reached. The law says councils must allocate social housing in line with their published allocations scheme.
12. The Council considered the information Ms X provided about her circumstances, the clarification regarding her record for housing allocation and its allocation scheme for band 2, when making its decisions. There was no undue delay in making its decisions and it explained its reasons at each stage.
13. We may not find fault with a council’s assessment of 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.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient of fault in the decision-making to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman