The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing transfer application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Miss X complained about the Council’s failure to allow her to bid on three-bedroom vacancies under the housing allocations policy. She also says it will not assist her with removal costs if she is successful in a transfer bid.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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, 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), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council. I have also considered the Council’s housing allocations policy.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss X says she needs to move from her existing council home because her son was attacked and she does not feel safe in her present location. The Council awarded her Band A priority under a discretionary Social Welfare Panel decision due to her need to re-locate.
The Council says she has not made any bids since she was awarded Band A status in 2023. Miss X says she needs a three-bedroom home and does not want to anything smaller. The Council’s allocations policy identifies her housing needs as two-bedrooms which is her current home. The banding priority was awarded on her need to move location and not because she was overcrowded or lacking bedrooms.
We 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. I have seen no evidence of fault which would suggest that Miss X’s application has not been considered properly.
Miss X also complained about the Council’s refusal to pay moving expenses if she finds a suitable vacancy. The Council says she is an existing tenant and it does not have a duty to pay removal expenses for transfers under the housing allocations procedure. It has a discretionary local welfare assistance policy which it has given details of to Miss X should she wish to apply.
The Ombudsman is 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 those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing transfer application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman