Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on Mr X’s housing register application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council did not award him any housing points. He considers it has not properly taken account of his disabilities in its decision making and it did not allow him the additional time he needed to gather evidence to support a review of its decision.

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))
3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
4. We cannot find that an organisation has breached the Equality Act. However, we can find an organisation at fault for failing to take account of its duties under the Equality Act.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council’s housing allocations policy requires applicants seeking points for housing and health needs to show:
• Their medical conditions are being caused or made worse by their housing conditions, and
• Their current property cannot be improved or adapted to meet their needs at a reasonable cost, and
• rehousing is likely to significantly improve their conditions.
8. The Council’s stage 1 response shows it considered Mr X’s information against its allocations policy. It noted his health issues made climbing the stairs in his property difficult but found he could still climb these at his own pace. The Council did not accept Mr X’s medical conditions were being made worse by his housing and so it did not award any points. The Council considered the information provided by Mr X and decided in line with its policy. There is not enough evidence of fault in its decision making to justify an investigation.
9. The documents show the Council gave Mr X two extensions to the deadline to provide evidence to support a stage 2 review, but it did not allow a third extension. The Council showed regard to its duties under the Equality Act 2010 by considering Mr X’s requests and making changes to its service. It is not within my remit to say it should have done more. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman