The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the operation of the Council’s housing allocations policy. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Miss X complained about the Council’s inability to inform her how long she will be on the housing register before she receives an offer of a home. She says this makes her anxious and she has been unsuccessful bidding on a limited number of vacancies which have become available.
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.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant. I have also considered the Council’s housing allocations policy.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss X says she lives in an overcrowded flat with her children. She applied to the housing list a year ago but to date has only been able to make bids on 34 vacancies within her banding. She wants to know how long she will be on the list before she is made an offer of housing.
The Council told Miss X that there have been 147 vacancies suitable for her to bid on, but she has restricted the areas of choice where she will move. Because she has chosen the most popular town this limits the opportunities and increases the numbers of other applicants also bidding for a popular location.
Miss X says the Council suggested she approached the housing associations who provide the vacancies directly. She tried this but was referred back to the housing list because most do not accept direct applications. The Council does not have its own housing stock, so these vacancies are all that become available.
The Council told her that it cannot tell her when she will be rehoused because the waiting list changes with new applicants in different circumstances and vacancies cannot be predicted.
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.
In this case the Council could not practically advise Miss X when she will be rehoused any more than any other housing authority given the fluid nature of the housing register and available vacancies.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the operation of the Council’s housing allocations policy. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman