Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing applciation. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation. Mr X failed to submit the required information in accordance with the Council’s housing allocation policy and his applciation was cancelled.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained that he was in contact with the Council for roughly seven years and replied to their letters in relation to staging on the Council's housing list. He states that after several years, the Council informed him he accrued 120 points, with a need to bid for a 1 bedroom flat. He states he was then informed he had not provided sufficient documentation requested for his 2017 application when he submitted a change in circumstances form in 2024. He says his application was closed and his time on th elist and points allcoation were lost.
   
   Mr X states the Council should reconsider his application and give his 120 points so he can bid. He states he has ADHD and will be turning 35 so and therefore entitled to a one bedroom property.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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

5. Mr X submitted his housing application in 2017, and the Council requested him to provide proof of identity, income and five years residence within the borough, however Mr X failed to provide proof of residence. He was allocated 120 points following an initial assessment but these were not effective and he was not registered on the online bidding system because he had not verified his identity and address with the required documents.
6. A new change of circumstances was received by the Council in April 2024. The Council made Mr X aware that he was not provided with log-in details for the Council’s choice-based lettings system as he had not provided the required documentary evidence.
7. Mr X was made aware of the updated housing allocation policy in March 2024. The Council emailed him again in September 2024, requesting for proof of identity and residence. The housing options officer also tried to contact him via telephone but was unable to reach him.
8. The evidence indicates that to date, the required documents have not been provided and in-line with Islington’s housing allocation policy, his application cannot be fully assessed due to the lack of information and documentary evidence.
9. At Stage 2 of the complaint, the Council explained to Mr X that he was initially awarded points on his application in-line with the process by which applications are assessed, hence the request for him to supply documentary evidence in 2017.
10. As Mr X mentioned he has ADHD, the Council stated that this condition may be taken into consideration once all the information requested has been provided, by means of a completed medical assessment form.
11. The Council’s allocation policy highlights that failing to provide proof of residency and identity in support of a housing application will result in significant issues, including potential suspension or closure of a housing application.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X's complaint as there insufficient evidence of fault to warrant our involvement. Mr X failed to submit the required information in accordance with the Council’s housing allocation policy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman