Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s failure to give her housing application sufficient priority since she was placed in temporary accommodation in 2016. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about being placed in temporary accommodation since 2016 and only having a band C status on the housing register. She has been moved several times due to changes in accommodation availability and wants to be rehoused in a 3-bedroom social housing property, not 2-bedroom temporary housing which she says is unsuitable for her children’s’ needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
5. The complainant now has an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X says her current accommodation is unsuitable because it is temporary and has only 2 bedrooms which is unsuitable for her needs. She has been moved several times in the past and wants a suitable social permanent home. She says the moves have left her son unsettled at school and that the nature of her housing affects his medical condition and her own mental health problems.
7. The Council says there is a high demand for housing in its area and that she is in the same banding as many other homeless applicants in temporary accommodation. It does not consider the accommodation to be unsuitable because it has three rooms which can be used for sleeping and does not leave her short of a bedroom in terms of its housing allocation scheme or overcrowding legislation.
8. Miss X has provided medical evidence from her GP, but the Council says this is insufficient to merit a higher banding priority.
9. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application/ 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.

Back to top

Final decision

We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman