Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council offering unsuitable accommodation. Miss X used the homelessness review procedure, which is the correct route for that matter. We cannot investigate the Council’s actions as landlord of Miss X’s social housing.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council offered her an unsuitable property and, after she moved in, failed to deal properly with problems including disrepair and infestations. She said this resulted in unsuitable living conditions, she has fallen, her children have suffered from being bitten by fleas, and mice have eaten her food and damaged her furniture.

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 it was reasonable, or would have been reasonable, for the person to ask for a council review or appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and complaint correspondence from the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X was homeless. The Council had a duty to offer suitable accommodation. The law says someone who thinks accommodation the Council has offered to end its homelessness duty it unsuitable can ask the Council for a review. (Housing Act 1996, section 202)
7. The Council offered Miss X a Council social housing tenancy to resolve her homelessness. Miss X moved in. She says the house is unsuitable. Miss X used her right to seek a review. The Council reviewed the matter and agreed the house was unsuitable. It says it is looking for alternative accommodation.
8. The law provides the review process to decide whether an offer was suitable. Miss X used that process and the decision was in her favour. It is not appropriate for the Ombudsman to become involved in the review process.
9. If the Council offers Miss X somewhere else, Miss X will again have the right to request a suitability review if she wishes.
10. If the Council does not offer somewhere else and Miss X is unhappy with how long the Council is taking after agreeing the current property is unsuitable, that would be a new matter, not part of the current complaint to the Ombudsman. Miss X should take any such new complaint through each stage of the Council’s complaints procedure before bringing it to the Ombudsman.
11. The Council’s handling of infestations, repairs and other concerns about the property once Miss X moved in relates to the Council actions as landlord of Miss X’s social housing. As paragraph 3 explained, we cannot consider those actions.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because the homelessness review procedure was the appropriate route for the suitability question and because we cannot consider the Council’s actions as a social housing landlord.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman