Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s housing application while waiting for her property to be sold. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council was not clear in explaining to her how far along the marketing/sale of her own property needed to be before she could be offered a property from the choice based letting system in operation for social housing in her area.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. 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)
3. 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. (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 the complainant and the Council, including its response to the complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X complained to the Council about its handling of her application on the choice based letting system. She had made her application with the aim of selling her privately owned property and taking on the social housing tenancy of a property more suited to her needs.
7. Ms X said the Council had not been clear about how far along the marketing/sale of her property needed to be before she could be offered a tenancy and that it had snooped on her instead of asking her what was happening with her property and the involvement of her estate agent.
8. The Council clarified, as had been explained to her earlier when her request for a higher banding priority had been granted, that her property had to be actively on the market prior to any tenancy property offer and that a social housing landlord may refuse her a property if her own property was not on the market or sold. The Council had decided that the sale of Ms X’s property had not been far enough along the sale process at the time a property she wanted had become available and it had not been offered to her.
9. This was disappointing for Ms X but there is no evidence to suggest fault affected the Council’s decision. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions made by councils with which complainants disagree and we cannot question council decisions where the right steps and have been taken and the relevant evidence and information considered.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman