Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to backdate emergency status on its housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s refusal to backdate a recent priority award on its housing register. She said this means her family will remain longer than they should in unsuitable accommodation.

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.

(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 Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

What happened

5. Ms X, who has two children with disabilities, applied to join the Council’s housing register. Her application was accepted and in July 2023, the Council awarded reasonable preference priority on medical grounds, effective from June, which is when the medical assessment was completed. In August 2023 it also awarded severe overcrowding with reasonable preference from June 2023.
6. In January 2025, an occupational therapist (OT) visited Ms X’s home to assess the family’s housing needs. They sent an OT Housing report to the Council on 27 January 2025. The Council considered the report in February 2025 and awarded emergency medical priority, effective from the date it received the OT report. The decision letter explained this was the highest level of medical priority available, but that Ms X could ask for a review if she disagreed with the decision.
7. I have not seen evidence Ms X asked for a review within 21 days, although I note that in March 2025 the Council cancelled an earlier review in relation to a decision in December 2024 on the grounds that circumstances had changed.
8. In June 2025, Ms made a complaint. She asked the Council to backdate the emergency priority to June 2023. She said the children’s needs had not changed since then, as evidenced by OT reports in November 2022 and January 2025.
9. In its complaint responses, the Council explained there were two levels of medical priority:
• reasonable preference, awarded when the home was assessed as unsuitable and was affecting someone’s health, which was awarded in 2023; and
• and emergency status, which was awarded in certain specific circumstances;
10. The Council said it did not have evidence to show the criteria for emergency status was met prior to January 2025, so the effective date was correct. It acknowledged errors in some of its letters, which it accepted may have caused confusion but said this were addressed promptly and did not affect the housing register application.

My assessment

11. We are not an appeal body. It is not our role to say whether the decisions the Council made were correct. We can consider the decision-making process but, unless there was fault in that process, we cannot comment on the decision reached.
12. When determining priority on its housing register, the Council was assessing the impact of the person’s current housing on their medical conditions. The OT report dated November 2022 that Ms X refers to sets out the medical conditions and difficulties relating to one of Ms X’s children but did not explain how their housing affects those conditions. Whilst the evidence at that stage led to the Council award reasonable preference on medical grounds and that two of the children needed their own rooms (which meant the family was severely overcrowded), it was not sufficient to show the family met the criteria for emergency status.
13. The later report, provided in January 2025, specifically addressed the impact of the current housing on the child’s medical conditions. Based on this, the Council awarded emergency status.
14. The records seen show the Council considered the information it had and its published allocation scheme at each decision point, and it explained the reasons for its decisions. There is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making to justify further investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman