Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint regarding the suitability of her accommodation. This is because in part, Ms X appealed the matter to a county court and in part there is no more worthwhile outcome achievable through further investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council failed to provide her with suitable accommodation and significantly delayed carrying out a statutory review into the property’s suitability.
2. Ms X said the Council’s actions have caused her significant distress and left her and her children living in accommodation that is negatively affecting their health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)
4. 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 no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council discharged its main housing duty to Ms X in April 2025 with an offer of a private-rented property. Ms X did not agree the property was suitable and requested a statutory review. The Council’s review maintained the property was suitable, so Ms X appealed the matter to a county court. As Ms X has appealed to a court, we cannot investigate this part of the complaint any further. This restriction on our powers is set out in paragraph three.
8. Before Ms X appealed to court, the Council delayed carrying out its statutory suitability review. It later accepted fault through its complaints process and apologised to Ms X. This is an administrative issue separable to the matters Ms X appealed to the court and so I have considered whether we should investigate this further.
9. The Council accepted fault and apologised. We would not recommend any further personal remedy than this, because the Council’s delayed review decision upheld that the property was suitable. We therefore cannot say, if not for this fault, Ms X would have been provided with alternative accommodation any sooner.
10. We also would not recommend any service improvements. As around this time, in another Ombudsman investigation we found fault with the Council for delays in carrying out these types of reviews and the Council agreed to put in place an action plan to prevent future delays. As the injustice caused by the fault has been appropriately remedied and the Council has already taken action to prevent recurrence of the fault in future, there is therefore no more worthwhile outcome achievable through further investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint regarding the suitability of her accommodation. This is because in part, Ms X appealed the matter to a county court and in part there is no more worthwhile outcome achievable through further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman