Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her housing situation. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council ignored medical evidence she submitted in support of her housing register application and her reports her property was unsafe. She said she and her children remained in unsuitable housing as a result.

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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Housing register application

5. The Council accepted Ms X’s housing register application in 2019. At various points, Ms X provided further medical evidence in relation to the impact of her housing on herself and her children. At each point, the Council re-assessed her application and issued a decision with review rights. Initially the Council awarded band C, based on 75 medical points (moderate) but in March 2025, it awarded band B, based on 150 medical points on its general needs queue. It assessed her as needing three bedrooms and awarded 50 points for overcrowding throughout.
6. Council records show Ms X had raised concerns about the safety of her property and, in particular, the risk her son could climb out of a window onto the roof, which he did in March 2025. The Council raised queries with her landlord about restrictors on windows on three occasions between January and August 2025. Its complaint response says it advised Ms X she could make a homelessness application in November 2024 if she considered it was not reasonable to remain in the property. This advice was repeated in August 2025. Also in August, the Council advised Ms X she was in position 76 on the general needs queue so would not be rehoused soon through the housing register.
7. We are not an appeal body. It is not our role to say whether the Council’s housing register decisions were correct. We consider the decision-making process but, unless there was fault in the process, we cannot comment on the decisions made.
8. Based on the records seen, the Council has considered the medical evidence provided and its allocations scheme at each decision point. It explained the reasons for its decisions and there was no undue delay in making them. It is clear the impact of the family’s current property increased over time. Its award of 150 points for medical need is the maximum available under its allocations scheme. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making to justify further investigation.

Homelessness application

9. Ms X made a homelessness application in August 2025. The Council made enquiries and accepted a relief duty. It explored with Ms X’s landlord whether it could urgently arrange a managed move for her. In Mid-October, the landlord confirmed it could not do so, following which the Council arranged interim accommodation. It accepted a main housing duty in late October 2025, following which the housing register application was moved to the homelessness queue.
10. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman