Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the suitability of vacancies occurring under the Council’s choice-based lettings system. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss B complained that the Council does not have enough wheelchair-accessible properties on its choice-based letting scheme. As a result, she has been unable to leave her home and her wellbeing has worsened.

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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation; or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss B complained that the Council lacked wheelchair-accessible properties, on which to bid, since 2024. As a result, she complained that she was unable to leave her house which meant that she was unable to attend appointments and her health suffered.
7. The Council disagreed with her complaint by responding to her that seven wheelchair-accessible properties had been available to bid on (between 1st January 2024 and 23rd July 2025), but she had not bid on any of these. Instead, she made bids on three wheelchair-inaccessible properties which were unsuitable for her needs.
8. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
9. The Council has a duty to maintain a housing register but there is no duty to maintain stocks of a particular type of property and it can only offer vacancies which occur in its existing stock or other housing providers. In this case it has had suitable vacancies for Miss B to bid on as they have occurred but she has not bid on those made available.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the suitability of vacancies occurring under the Council’s choice-based lettings system. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman