Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about her housing register and homelessness applications. There is not enough evidence of fault and injustice to justify an investigation. It is also reasonable to expect Miss X to seek a review of the Council’s decision to end the main housing duty.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that the Council:

• Subjected her to inappropriate, traumatic and discriminatory questioning when she made a homelessness application.
• Failed to place her housing register application in the correct priority band as it did not recognise she was fleeing domestic abuse.
• Wrongly refused to allow her to bid on two bedroom properties despite evidence she required an overnight carer.

2. Miss X says that as a result she has been unable to move away from the risk of domestic abuse which has caused her health to suffer.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X applied for the Council’s housing register several years ago as she was fleeing domestic abuse. Miss X considers the Council should have accepted she had a local connection so placed her in a higher priority band. We will not investigate how the Council considered Miss X’s priority when she first applied for the housing register. Miss X would have been aware of the Council’s decision that she did not have local connection in 2023 at the latest. So, the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate it now.
8. In early 2025, Miss X requested the Council increase her housing priority due to her medical needs. The Council considered Miss X’s request. It then notified her that she was placed in band B.
9. Miss X made a homelessness application. The Council accepted the relief duty and then the main housing duty to Miss X due to the risk of domestic abuse. The Council increased Miss X’s priority on the housing register to band B+ when it accepted the relief duty.
10. Miss X asked to be eligible for two bedroom properties as she required an overnight carer. The Council considered Miss X’s request together with a supporting letter from a medical professional. The Council refused Miss X’s request as it considered she did not meet the criteria for a second bedroom.
11. The Council offered a property to Miss X which she refused as she did not consider it to be suitable. The Council ended the main housing duty as it considered the property was suitable for Miss X’s needs.
12. We are not an appeal body so we do not come to our own view on what housing priority should be awarded or the size of property a person is eligible for. Our role is to consider if the Council has followed the proper processes when making its decision.
13. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about her housing priority. Miss X considers the Council should have increased her housing priority due to past known domestic abuse. Miss X did not raise domestic abuse when she requested an increase in her priority. So, the Council did not need to revisit its decision on whether she had local connection. The Council increased Miss X’s priority to band B + when it accepted the relief duty. So, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation into this aspect of Miss X’s complaint.
14. We note the Council did not notify Miss X of her right to seek a review of the Council’s decision on her priority band. But we will not investigate this matter as there is not enough evidence of injustice to Miss X. We cannot know if Miss X would have requested a review or the outcome of any review.
15. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about officers’ inappropriate, discriminatory and traumatic questioning when carrying out her homelessness assessment. The interview with Miss X was not recorded so we would not be able to establish if there was any fault in how officers conducted the homelessness assessment. So, an investigation would not be able to add anything more to the investigation carried out by the Council.
16. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that she is not eligible for a two bedroom property. The Council’s decision letter shows it considered the evidence provided by Miss X and explained why she was not eligible for a two bedroom property. So, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation into this aspect of Miss X’s complaint.
17. We will not investigate the Council’s decision to end the main housing duty. Miss X has the right to seek a review of the Council’s decision, including its decision that the property offered was suitable. She can then appeal to the county court on a point of law if the Council does not change its decision following the review. The Council notified Miss X of her right to seek a review, so it is reasonable to expect her to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault and injustice to justify investigating this complaint. It is also reasonable to expect Miss X to seek a review of the Council’s decision to end the main housing duty.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman