Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to award her medical priority on her housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained that the Council refused to consider her medical evidence and award her medical priority. She says her living conditions has caused physical and emotional harm to her daughter, due safeguarding risks triggered by her son’s medical needs. She would like the Council to review her case further and award her medical priority.

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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome; or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants; or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(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. Miss X applied to join the Council’s housing register due to her son’s medical needs. The Council carried out a medical assessment and decided that Miss X did not qualify for medical priority because her son’s medical conditions were not formally diagnosed and did not warrant medical priority.
6. Miss X requested a review of the Council’s decision. The Council considered Miss X’s review request but did not change its decision.
7. We are not an appeal body so we will not come to our own view on whether the Council should award medical priority to Miss X. Our role is to consider if the Council has followed the proper processes when making its decision.
8. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application or a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme. We recognise that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas.
9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. When dealing with Miss X’s review request, the Council carried out a further medical assessment of Miss X’s circumstances, the evidence provided and its own allocation policy. There was no undue delay in making its decision and the Council’s review decision letter set out the evidence it considered. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify us investigating further.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman