Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that she is not eligible to join its housing register. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s decision she did not qualify to join its housing register because she had not satisfied its local connection criteria. She said the Council had failed to properly consider that she had a long-term and established connection to the Council’s area. She says she previously lived continuously in the Council’s area for over five years until 2023 and then, after a break of nine months, returned to live there in 2024.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and the Council’s housing allocation scheme (updated April 2025 and available online).

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council’s housing allocation scheme explains that it will only accept an applicant to its housing register if they have a local connection to the Council’s borough. To have a local connection, an applicant must be resident in the Council’s area and have lived in its area continuously for at least five years before the date they apply to join.
7. The scheme sets out categories of applicants where an exception is made to the local connection requirement.
8. Miss X applied to join the Council’s housing register. The Council considered her application but decided she was not eligible. It said this was because, in the five years prior to the date she applied to join, she had not continuously lived in its area. This meant Miss X did not meet the local connection criteria set out in its scheme.
9. Miss X requested a review of the decision. As part of its review, the Council considered information Miss X provided. It decided to uphold its decision that she was not eligible to join the housing register.
10. 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.
11. We will not investigate this complaint. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making to justify investigating. I recognise that Miss X says, prior to a break of nine months, she lived continuously in the Council’s area for over five years and moved back in 2024. The Council appropriately considered Miss X’s housing application, including information about her previous residency in its area. It decided she was not eligible to join the housing register and provided clear reasons with reference to its scheme. It explained Miss X had not provided information to show she would qualify as an exemption to the local connection requirement. Its decision appears in line with its housing allocations scheme and so we cannot question the outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that she is not eligible to join its housing register. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman