Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to allow her to join its housing register. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision she did not qualify to join its housing register because she did not meet its residency criteria. She said the Council failed to consider her husband’s exceptional medical circumstances and the family support available in the Council’s area.

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 and the Council. I also considered the Council’s Housing Allocations Policy (as amended in July 2025).
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What happened

6. Mrs X applied to join the Council’s housing register. Mrs X said she needed to move to the Council’s area because of her husband’s medical needs and the need to be closer to family support in its area.
7. The Council’s allocations policy says applicants must have lived in the Borough for two years continuously before the application was made. This is called the local connection criteria. It decided Mrs X did not qualify to join its scheme because she had not met that criteria.
8. Mrs X asked for a review.
9. At review, the Council set out some of the key exceptions to the local connection criteria. It explained that Mrs X’s circumstances did not fall into one of the exceptions under its scheme. It therefore concluded the decision to close the case was correct.

Back to top

My assessment

10. It is not our role to say whether the Council’s decisions were correct. We can consider the decision-making process. However, unless there was fault in the decision-making, we cannot comment on the decision reached.
11. Councils have wide powers when deciding their allocations schemes to meet local needs. This means councils can set local connection criteria. The law says councils must allocate social housing in line with their published allocations policy.
12. This Council’s policy says applicants must normally have lived in the area for two years but also lists circumstances where the criteria may not apply. The Council’s review decision shows it considered the information Mrs X provided and its allocations policy when making its decision. It explained the reasons for its decision, and it made the decision without delay. Its decision was in line with its published allocations scheme. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman