Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to use a building close to the complainant’s home to house unaccompanied asylum seeker children. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision to use a building in her road as a centre to house unaccompanied asylum seeker children.
2. She says the Council has not listened to residents, is concerned about safety, and says her property will lose value.
3. Mrs X wants the Council to find an alternative location for the centre.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 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

5. I considered information provided by Mrs X.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council confirms the High Court ruled it must take every possible step to increase capacity to house Unaccompanied Asylum Seeker (UAS) children. It also advised the legal process is continuing and it must obey the court ruling.
8. The Council also confirms:
• it has not experienced disturbances in areas with established reception centres for UAS children
• it has considered other buildings before progressing with the former care centre which it recognises it is a suitable site
• meetings will take place for residents, representatives, and Officers to discuss concerns
• no work is being carried out on the site which breaches any covenants
• it is working with the owner of the property (NHS) to change the covenant to allow accommodation of UAS children; and
• the facility will be a temporary home for children while they await transfer to the care of other authorities.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process. It has chosen to use the former care facility and has given its reasons for doing so. Without evidence of fault in the decision-making process we cannot criticise the Council’s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman