Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s assessed bedroom need on the Council’s housing register. This is because the Council has already taken appropriate action and there is no more worthwhile outcome achievable by further investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council wrongly decided he was only eligible for three bedrooms on its housing register. Mr X said in doing so, the Council failed to properly consider the recommendations made by an occupational therapist.
2. Mr X wants the Council to give full weight to the recent occupational therapy assessment and amend his bedroom entitlement accordingly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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.
4. We do not start or continue an investigation if there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation, or if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X lives in a property that is unsuitable for his disability and is seeking alternative accommodation through the Council’s allocations scheme.
8. An occupational therapist (OT) issued a new report for Mr X regarding his housing needs. Previous OT reports recommended he needed a three-bedroom property. The new report said he needed four bedrooms.
9. Council A considered the report and told Mr X it believed the report was flawed. If Mr X consented, the Council said it would fund an independent OT to carry out an assessment and the Council would compare the findings.
10. Mr X was unhappy with this decision. He said his medical circumstances had changed, which was among several reasons for the change in recommendation. Mr X declined the offer of an independent OT assessment, as he said this would involve the independent therapist seeing an undue amount of his personal information.
11. Mr X complained to the Council and to the Ombudsman. He said he wants the Council to update his application to say he needs a four-bedroom property but can also be considered for three-bedroom properties, in line with the recommendations in the latest OT report.
12. I have considered Mr X’s complaint but have decided we will not investigate this further. The Council offered to fund an independent OT assessment so the two findings could be compared. I am satisfied that this was appropriate action for the Council to take to resolve this dispute and so there is no more worthwhile outcome achievable by further investigation.
13. It is open to Mr X to accept the Council’s offer to arrange an independent occupational therapy assessment to resolve this dispute.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has already taken appropriate action and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman