Summary: We will not investigate this complaint regarding the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making to justify our involvement and further investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained that the Council has failed to properly assess his medical needs when deciding his housing application. Mr X also complained that the Council failed in its statutory duty by not sufficiently taking into account his care leaver status when making its housing application decision.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘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. Mr X says the Council failed to properly consider his medical needs for his housing application because he is a care leaver and his GP recommended that he should be allocated a one-bedroom flat. The Council’s assessment is not limited to a specific type of property but as a single person he may be considered for a studio flat which he says would not be suitable.
6. The Council carried out a medical assessment and considered his medical evidence but it did not change his priority. Under its allocations policy the council must consider care leavers to have reasonable preference. The Council has done this but it does not need to allocate them a specific type of property. The Council’s decision was that a studio flat would be suitable for Mr X’s needs as a single person and that his medical needs do not meet the threshold for a limit to larger flats.
7. We are not an appeal body. It is not our role to say whether the Council’s decision was correct. Unless there was 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.
8. The Council considered the information Mr X provided about his circumstances its own allocation scheme and supporting documents when making its decision. There was no undue delay in making its decisions and it explained its reasons at each stage. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify us investigating further.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint regarding the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making to justify our involvement and further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman