Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr C’s complaint about the Council’s response to his questions about the state of housing in his area. This is because we would not be able to safely conclude he has suffered injustice as a direct result of administrative fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr C, complained that the Council failed to answer his questions about the state of housing in his area adequately and satisfactorily. Mr C told us his current accommodation is in disrepair, it is cold, damp and has inadequate heating.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered the information Mr C provided and his comments on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr C asked the Council what it was doing about the lack of social housing in its area. He said there was major housing development in his area. He asked the Council if it knew what percentage would be for social housing.
7. In its reply the Council listed the number of potential new housing units in current residential planning permissions, the number which were affordable housing units and the percentage of affordable housing in the total of potential new housing units. The Council said none of the current applications were for social rented accommodation. But it told Mr C it is the Council’s priority to encourage social rent and it hoped this would increase in the coming years.
8. Mr C says the Council’s answers were too vague, confusing and unhelpful. He is seeking some help in understanding it. He wants to know how much social and affordable housing there is in a specific new development rather than in a wider geographical area.
9. Mr C has questioned the lack of social housing planned in his area and whether the Council has a strategy which will address this.
10. To put things right Mr C wants more social housing to be built in his area. But this is not something which can be achieved through a complaint to the Ombudsman. Our role is to consider individual complaints of personal injustice caused by administrative fault by the Council. We look at the Council’s decision-making process. We cannot criticise the merits of the Council’s strategy and priorities if there is no evidence of fault in its decision-making process. Mr C is saying he is suffering injustice because he lives in unsatisfactory housing and there is insufficient social housing in his area. But we would not be able to safely conclude he has suffered injustice as a direct result of administrative fault by the Council. An investigation by the Ombudsman would not be the appropriate way for Mr C to get the outcome he is seeking.
11. The Council publishes its corporate strategy on its website together with quarterly reports in its performance. Mr C has the right under the Freedom of Information Act to ask for any further official information he thinks the Council holds. If the Council refuses his request or he is dissatisfied with the way it deals with it, he can complain. If he remains dissatisfied, it is then reasonable to expect him to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner because the Information Commission has the specific powers and expertise to deal with Freedom of Information Act issues.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because we would not be able to safely conclude Mr C has suffered injustice as a direct result of administrative fault by the Council.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman