Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to rehouse Mr X despite him having been on the housing register for six years. This is because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains he has been on the housing register to be rehoused for six years and that despite having a Band 2 priority the Council has failed to rehouse him. He alleges officers are doctoring the allocations system to prevent his bids being successful.

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. Mr X complained to the Council because he had been bypassed for a property he bid for and thought he was suitable for. The Council explained the property was above ground floor level with no lift and that his Band 2 medical priority was based on his mobility problems which made the flat unsuitable.
7. In response to his complaint about the time he has been waiting, the Council pointed out he had refused an offer made in 2022 and that due to very high demand and a shortage of social housing, applicants may be on the housing register a long time.
8. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions made by councils with which complainants disagree. We cannot question council decisions which have been properly taken with the rights steps followed and the relevant evidence and information considered.
9. While Mr X’s wait to move is disappointing for him, there is no evidence to suggest the Council has not properly followed its housing allocations policy and no evidence to suggest officers have deliberately doctored the operation of the system to ensure he does not receive an offer. Mr X is in Band 2 which is not the highest banding so if an applicant with a higher banding priority bids for a property he has, they will be successful.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman