Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s housing. This is because the complaint is in part late and in part, the Council has already taken sufficient action to remedy any injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council:
1. delayed considering whether he was statutorily overcrowded in his property; and
2. failed to properly consider his medical need to move to a larger property.
2. Mr X said as a result he and his family have been caused distress and have lived for too long in unsuitable accommodation.

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. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by the council, 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)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than twelve months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, 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

Complaint 1a)

7. The Council took thirteen weeks to respond to Mr X’s report that he was statutorily overcrowded. The Council apologised for this delay and offered to pay Mr X £65 to reflect the frustration caused. When the Council did consider Mr X’s statutory overcrowding form, it considered the measurements of the property, his household and the amount of sleeping areas (living room and bedroom) and found he was not statutorily overcrowded.
8. We will not investigate this complaint further as we could not add to the investigation the Council has already carried out and the Council has taken appropriate action to remedy the injustice caused by the delay.

Complaint 1b)

9. Mr X complains the Council failed to properly consider his medical needs when awarding his priority on the housing register. The Council assessed Mr X’s medical information and agreed he had a severe medical need to move and was awarded Band 2. Mr X did not raise a complaint with the Ombudsman about this banding decision until more than a year after this.
10. We will not investigate this complaint further, as Mr X should have complained to us about this sooner. If Mr X has new medical information or evidence not already considered, it is open to him to ask the Council again to carry out a review of his banding.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is in part late and in part it has already been adequately remedied by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman