Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about how the Council handled her housing situation because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement. Ms X had the right to ask for a review of the Council’s recent decision to change her priority band and it was reasonable for her do so.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council was discriminating against her on grounds of race. She said the Council:
1. had deliberately placed tenants of a different racial background in the property next to hers, then “rewarded” those tenants with rehousing after a few months, whilst Ms X had been waiting for rehousing for years;
2. was treating her complaints of discrimination as reports of antisocial behaviour or noise and wrongly advising her to contact the noise team;
3. had wrongly changed the effective date on her housing register application, which would delay her being rehoused;
4. had repeatedly rejected her frequent bids for social housing without explaining its reasons; and
5. had not supported her to get her a management transfer or given her information about its criteria for management transfers.
2. Ms X said that, as a result of the Council’s failings, she remained in housing that did not meet her disability needs. She wants the Council to rehouse her and make a payment for its delay in doing so and discriminatory behaviour.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X previously complained about the Council’s failure to rehouse her, which we investigated jointly with the Housing Ombudsman Service, and issued a final decision in July 2023. We will not reconsider complaints that we have previously investigated so this decision will only set out the issues that have arisen since.

Complaint a)

7. Ms X previously complained about noise and anti-social behaviour by tenants in the property next to hers. She now says they were “rewarded” by rehousing ahead of her. The Council said the previous tenants moved after arranging a mutual exchange with other tenants.
8. We will not consider this complaint further because there is insufficient evidence to fault to justify our involvement.

Complaint b)

9. Ms X complained about noise from her new neighbours. Although she believed the behaviour was racially motivated, it was not fault for the Council to advise her to contact its noise team. The noise team investigated her reports, including considering the noise recordings she had made, and wrote to Ms X to explain there was no noise that could be considered unreasonable that would justify formal action. It closed its case in December 2023, and the Council said it had not received any further reports.
10. We will not consider this complaint further. The Council has taken the action we would expect and written to Ms X with the outcome. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

Complaint c)

11. Ms X’s priority band was changed from 3 to 2 in September 2023 to reflect concerns she may be a victim of hate crime. The Council removed the additional priority in March 2024 because it said hate crime was no longer an issue. As a result, her application went back into band 3 with the effective date she had before the change to band 2. The Council wrote to Ms X with its decision and told her she could ask for a review if she disagreed with it.
12. We will not consider this complaint further. Ms X had a right of review, and it was reasonable for her to use that right. In any case, the banding decision is in line with the Council’s published scheme so there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Complaint d)

13. The Council allocates housing in line with its published scheme, which says it will first consider the priority band of the applicant and then their effective date. It provided records for the properties Ms X had bid for since January 2024. These show Ms X was not successful because other applicants were higher on the list than she was. In other words, the other applicants either had a higher priority band or had been waiting longer for rehousing than Ms X (or both).
14. We will not consider this complaint further because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Complaint e)

15. The Council said it had not considered Ms X for a management transfer because she did not meet its criteria for this.
16. It is unclear when Ms X first asked about a management transfer. She did not mention this in her initial complaint but did so when she asked for a stage 2 complaint response.
17. The Council’s policy sets out the situations in which it will consider a management transfer, and these do not apply to Ms X’s situation. It is unclear whether it explained this to Ms X or gave her a copy of its policy. If it failed to do so, this may have caused an injustice to Ms X because she was left with some uncertainty about why a management transfer had not been considered. However, this injustice is not sufficiently significant to justify further investigation and we could not, in any event, achieve the outcome Ms X wants, which is to ask the Council to rehouse her. Therefore, we will not consider this complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault. Further, Ms X had the right to ask for a review of the recent housing register decision and it was reasonable for her to exercise that right.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman