Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision Mr X does not qualify to join the housing register. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council wrongly refused his application to join the housing register. He said the Council failed to properly consider his children as members of his household and wants the Council to make a new 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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

(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.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

The published scheme

5. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
6. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme.
7. Applicants to the housing register can request reviews of certain decisions, including decisions that they do not qualify to join the housing register. Reviews should generally be carried out within 21 days of the request and must be carried out by an officer senior to the original decision maker, or by a panel not including the original decision maker.
8. Mr X has a shared custody arrangement for his children and they live with him for part of the week. Mr X applied to the Council’s housing register as he said his property was too small and the children needed a separate bedroom.
9. The Council refused Mr X’s application as it said he did not have a local connection and did not have a housing need, as set out in the Council’s allocations policy.
10. Mr X requested a review of the decision and the Council said it would overturn its original decision that he did not have a local connection, as this was made in error. However it maintained its decision that he did not have a housing need. It explained this was because, according to its allocations policy, children can only be considered members of a applicant’s household if the applicant is the full-time carer for the children and the children do not have a home elsewhere.
11. The Council will only allow applicants to join its allocations scheme if an applicant has a local connection and an assessed housing need, so it said Mr X still did not qualify.
12. The Council took several weeks longer to issue its review decision, than the 21 days recommended in law.
13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint further. The Council corrected its error about local connection through its review process, so there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify further investigation.
14. The Council also applied its allocations policy correctly with regards to Mr X’s household. The review decision was carried out in line with the relevant law and guidance and its published allocations scheme. There is again insufficient evidence of fault here that would justify further investigation.
15. The Council delayed making its review decision. However as this delay did not lead to any frustration of Mr X’s housing rights, I do not consider any fault caused enough injustice to warrant investigating the matter further.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman