Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s assessment of her housing application. She says she should be placed in Band 1 instead of the Band 2 priority which she was awarded in 2023 following a medical review. She asked for the banding to be reviewed but the review did not alter her current priority.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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 cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council’s responses. I have also considered the Council’s housing allocations policy.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X says the Council has given her housing application insufficient priority. She says she should be given Band 1 priority after she was given band 2 status in 2023 following a medical review. She asked the Council to further review her application in 2023 and in 2024 she was told that her banding was correct for her circumstances and that she does not meet the strict criteria for Band 1 which is only awarded for 6 months subject to reconsideration.
7. Miss X says her social rented home is unaffordable and that she has had problems with disrepair and neighbours over the past years. We cannot consider complaints about social housing tenancies and she would have to complain to the Housing Ombudsman service about these matters. She has also received a s.21 possession notice from her landlord.
8. The Council says Miss X is in the correct banding for her circumstances and if she is faced with homelessness in future this will be dealt with according to the homelessness duties under the Housing Act 1996.
9. 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.
10. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application or 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 should be placed in a higher banding.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman