The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Ms X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Ms X complained about the Council’s assessment of her housing application. She says she should be allowed to bid in 2-bedroomed properties because she needs additional space for equipment connected to her medical condition.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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) 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: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms X lives in a 2-bedroomed new-build housing association property which she says has dampness problems. Because of this she has applied to the Council’s housing register. The Council told her that, following a revision of its housing allocations policy in 2021, she does not qualify for a 2-bedroomed property.
Ms X provided an occupational therapist’s report to support her application. The Council says the report did not state that she requires an additional bedroom but that it would be ideally suitable. The occupational therapist confirmed that the equipment would have to be essential to preserve life, such as a dialysis machine or similar. The Council says it would only allocate 2 bedroom properties for such needs or where a live-in carer required an additional room. It has advised Ms X to seek a mutual exchange because her property is likely to be desirable to other applicants.
We will not uphold a complaint if the council has followed proper procedures, relevant legislation and guidance and taken account of all the information provided, even if the applicant believes that the council should have given more priority to the application to move. It may be the case that, although they need to move urgently, there are other applicants who have an even greater need.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Ms X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman