Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to award her priority on its housing register. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision. We cannot consider Miss X’s complaints about disrepair or the Council’s management of her social housing.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council decided not to award her priority on its housing register. She says she needs to move because of disrepair, anti-social behaviour and health concerns made worse by her current property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Miss X moved into her current Council property in December 2022. She says there have been issues with disrepair and anti-social behaviour which have affected her health.
9. Miss X asked to join the Council’s housing register saying these issues were affecting her health. The Council did not to approve the request. It said Miss X’s current property had been assessed as suitable by disability housing advisers, and it had not received medical evidence establishing a direct link between the condition of the property and her health.
10. We are 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 has followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, even if someone disagrees with it.
11. The Council considered Miss X’s circumstances and explained why it decided she was adequately housed. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the process the Council followed when deciding whether Miss X qualified to join its housing register. We will therefore not investigate this part of the complaint. It remains open to Miss X to provide the Council with further medical evidence should she wish to do so.
12. Miss X also complains about disrepair and the Council’s response to her request for a management move. These matters concern the Council’s management of its social housing and are outside our jurisdiction. Complaints about the management of social housing may be considered by the Housing Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision that she was adequately housed, and we cannot consider her complaints about the Council’s management of her social housing.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman