Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council's handling of her housing application because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains that the Council’s assessment of her housing application. She says the Council has failed to consider the issue of overcrowding when it placed her in the Band B 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.

(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. Ms X applied to the Council’s housing register and was awarded Band B priority in 1995. She believed the Council had not given sufficient consideration to her overcrowding and medical circumstances and asked for a review. The Council reviewed the evidence Ms X submitted and their allocations policy and decided that Band B is the most appropriate priority banding for Ms X. She does not meet the criteria for Band A as she does not have medical needs which meet the high threshold for that priority. She does not meet the level of overcrowding to qualify for Band A which requires a lack of three or more bedrooms.
6. 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.
7. We 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. There is no evidence that the council failed to consider Ms X’s application according to the policy.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council's handling of her housing allocation because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman