Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant cannot join the housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, disagrees with the Council’s decision to refuse his application to join the housing register. He also says the Council delayed doing a review. Mr X wants to move to a one bedroom flat and he wants the Council to pay compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence, letters about his housing application, and the medical evidence. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council’s housing allocation policy says people can join the housing register if they have a housing need as defined by the policy. A person may have a housing need if their accommodation affects their health. The policy says a single person has a one bedroom need which can be met in a studio flat or one bedroom flat.
5. Mr X complained to us in 2022 about the Council’s decision that he could not join the housing register on medical grounds. We did not investigate the complaint because there was no suggestion of fault in the way the Council assessed the application.
6. Mr X re-applied to join the housing register in 2023. He supplied medical evidence and said his ground floor studio accommodation is medically unsuitable; Mr X lives alone. He explained why he needs to move to a one bedroom home.
7. The Council assessed the application but decided Mr X does not have a housing need as defined by the policy. The Council noted his accommodation includes all the expected facilities and is the correct size for a single person. It accepted Mr X has some medical issues but decided there is insufficient evidence his health is affected by his accommodation.
8. Mr X asked for a review in November 2023. The Council completed the review in May 2024 and confirmed Mr X is ineligible to join the housing register. The Council apologised for the delayed response.
9. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. I appreciate Mr X would like more space but that is not a housing need as defined by the policy. The policy says Mr X needs a studio or one bedroom flat and that is what he has. The Council considered the medical evidence and decided it does not show the property has a negative impact on his health such that he meets the threshold to join the housing register.
10. We are not an appeal body and it is my role to re-make the decision or decide if Mr X is eligible to join the register. I can only consider if there was fault in the way the Council made the decision and I see no suggestion of fault. The Council considered all the evidence, including a letter of support from Mr X’s GP, but decided the body of evidence does not show he qualifies. I appreciate Mr X disagrees but that does not mean there was fault in the way the Council made the decision.
11. The Council delayed responding to Mr X’s review request. This, however, did not cause an injustice because the outcome of the review was that Mr X does not qualify to join the housing register. The delay did not mean there was a delay in Mr X joining the housing register.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman