The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint which was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner about the suitability of his accommodation. We cannot investigate the actions of his social housing landlord because it is a body outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the assessment of his housing application because there is insufficient evidence of fault.
The complaint
Mr X complained abut the allocation of social housing in 2015 which was unsuitable for his needs. He says he has been seeking a move since then because of neighbours and lack of space.
He also complained about the failure of his social housing landlord to resolve his complaints about neighbours whom he says smoke cannabis and he can smell the fumes.
Mr X complained about the Council’s assessment of his application to move to more suitable housing.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended) We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended) 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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X applied to the Council in 2014 for rehousing and accepted a tenancy with a social housing landlord in 2015. He says the property has been unsuitable for his needs and he should not have been offered the tenancy. We will not exercise discretion to consider this complaint. It relates to matters which took place seven years ago and there is no evidence to suggest the Mr X could not have complained to us sooner.
Mr X says his social housing landlord has failed to take action over neighbours who smoke cannabis and affect his flat with the fumes. We have no authority to investigate social housing landlords about the management of their tenancies.
Mr X also complained about the Councils’ assessment of his current application on the housing register. He says the Council has failed to give sufficient attention to his medical needs. He has applied for three bedroom accommodation, but the Council says he only needs two and can only be considered for this. He asked the Council to review the decision, but the review outcome remained unchanged.
The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application/ a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme. We recognise that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. We may not find fault with a council for failing to re-house someone, if it has prioritised applicants and allocated properties according to its published lettings scheme policy.
Final decision
We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint which was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner about the suitability of his accommodation. We cannot investigate the actions of his social housing landlord because it is a body outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the assessment of his housing application because there is insufficient evidence of fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman