The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about housing allocations. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making about whether Mr X qualifies to join the housing register to justify investigating. There is not enough injustice to Mr X from delay and communication to justify investigating this in isolation.
The complaint
Mr X complained about the Council’s decision he did not qualify to join its housing register. He said the Council failed properly to consider his medical needs and overcrowding. He also complained about delay in the Council’s review of its decision and poor communication.
Mr X says as a result, he and his family remain overcrowded. He says the delays caused avoidable distress and uncertainty.
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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) 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 information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council decided Mr X did not qualify to join its housing register because he did not meet any of its criteria. Mr X asked for a review of this decision.
We are not an appeal body. We do not decide whether a decision is right or make our own decision. We consider whether there was fault in how the Council made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome.
In Mr X’s case, the Council’s review decision sets out the Council’s policy accurately. It demonstrates it considered the information and evidence Mr X provided about his health and overcrowding. The decision applies the evidence to the policy and arrives at a decision open to the Council. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to justify it.
The Council accepted and apologised to Mr X for its delay completing the review and poor communication with him about it. We will not investigate this part of the complaint further. Although it is likely an investigation would find there was fault, there is not enough injustice to Mr X to justify investigating. The outcome of the review was to maintain the original decision Mr X did not qualify. Mr X has not, therefore, missed out on any time on the housing register or missed any offers because of the delay. The distress and uncertainty to Mr X is not a significant enough injustice on its own to justify investigating.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault causing injustice to justify investigating.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman