The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to correctly assess her income or properly consider her financial circumstances when it cancelled her application to its housing register. We did not find fault in the Council’s decision making process.
The complaint
Mrs X complains the Council unfairly disqualified her from the housing register as it did not correctly consider her financial circumstances. This prevented her from being shortlisted for a property and she has been removed from the register.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended) We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered the information provided by Mrs X.
I made enquiries of the Council and considered its written responses and information it provided.
Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Law and guidance Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14)) The Housing Act 1996 details factors that Councils may take into account when determining priorities including a person’s available funds to meet housing cost, a person’s behaviour, and a person’s local connection.
The Council’s allocation policy Under “Financial qualification”: “Qualifying applicants will not have savings, assets or an annual income above the set caps. Any applicant with a total net income savings or assets above the appropriate levels will be expected to meet their own housing needs and will not qualify to join the housing waiting list”.
When assessing a household against the financial criteria, the Council applies the net income of the applicant. Net income includes any income such as salary, child benefit, child maintenance payments, bank interest and all other financial deposits.
Summary of key relevant events In October 2022, the Council accepted Mrs X onto its housing register for three bedroomed properties. In late April 2023, the Council shortlisted her for consideration of a property she had bid on.
The Council asked Mrs X to provide proof of benefits and income for the last three months as well as statements from all bank accounts. She responded the same day providing evidence. The following day the Council contacted her to ask for full statements from one of her bank accounts and proof of universal credit payments. It also asked Mrs X to provide further information on the payments she received from individuals.
Mrs X explained that some payments she received from family members were to help support a relative who was studying in the UK. She said other payments were part of a community saving scheme she ran. She explained members of the scheme would pay her at the end of each month. She provided a screenshot of a message relating to the setup of the scheme.
The Council responded saying the details given were not sufficient to explain what the payments were for. It made the decision to suspend her application because she appeared to be over the financial threshold.
In mid-May 2023, the Council made a decision that Mrs X was over the financial threshold of £64,900 for a three-bedroom need.
In late May 2023, Mrs X appealed the decision stating her income had been assessed incorrectly and was only around £26,000 a year. She stated the Council should not consider the savings scheme that she is the organiser for. The Council asked her to provide statements from June 2022 to May 2023, proof of income and benefits and any other evidence.
Mrs X provided bank statements, a statement explaining the saving scheme and statements from members of the scheme in support of her appeal. She said each member would contribute money monthly to one of her accounts and this would be sent to another member on rotation. She said she made no profit from the group. She also explained a loan she had.
The Council’s decision letter explained it carried out a check of accounts held by Mrs X. It noted she had not provided any statements for another account held in her name. It still completed an assessment using the information provided. It explained it assessed each account separately. It calculated overall, the payments into her accounts from third parties amounted to just over £175,000 and she had received £73,000 from other payments including salary, benefits, and cash deposits. In line with its policy, it considered this income.
In relation to Mrs X being part of a savings scheme; it noted the payments being made into her account far exceeded the payments leaving it. It said she had regular payments not named as contributions being paid to her. It concluded she was clearly over the financial threshold of £64,900 for her assessed bedroom need. It upheld its decision to cancel her application for the housing register.
In response to my enquiries, the Council said Mrs X did not provide evidence to show she did not have access to this money for her own use. It had concerns about some transactions going in and out due to the nature of the references next to them. It noted the letters and emails of support from other members. In its view, it would expect one separate account to be used for such a savings scheme to keep track of the transactions, but these were placed across all of Mrs X’s bank accounts without clear references for them.
Analysis We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed these, we cannot question the professional merits of a decision, regardless of whether a complainant disagrees with it.
The Council considered Mrs X’s finances from the information she provided, and it considered her explanation for some of the transactions. It asked for further information and evidence. After reviewing this for her appeal, it later explained how it had assessed her accounts and what payments it counted as income (not just her salary), in line with its allocations policy. It considered her further evidence, but it was satisfied she still did not qualify to be on the housing register. The Council is entitled to take all of this financial information into account, and it is up to the Council how much weight it puts on the evidence provided. I am satisfied it did this as it explained how it made its decision based on the information, bank statements, and transactions it had seen.
But in any event, even if the Council had excluded the payments from her savings scheme, it still assessed the rest of her income (around £73,000) as above the £64,900 financial threshold for her household need. On the balance of probabilities, the outcome would not have been any different.
I do not find fault in the way the Council reached its decisions that Mrs X’s income exceeded the financial threshold. It is a decision it is entitled to make. If there is no fault in the decision making process, then I cannot criticise the Council’s decision.
Final decision
I do not uphold the complaint as I did not find fault with the Council’s actions. I have completed my investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman