Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s recent banding decisions. The Council has upheld the complaint that it delayed reviewing whether Miss X is statutorily overcrowded. It has agreed to suitable remedies and further investigation by us would not be proportionate.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council is not helping her to move despite her medical needs and being overcrowded. She wants a direct offer or to be awarded Band 1.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and the Council’s Housing Allocations Policy (dated 2013 and published online).

Back to top

My assessment

8. In August 2024, Miss X complained to the Council that she had been in Band 2 for over a year, but it had failed to move her to alternative accommodation. Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s original decision to award Band 2 is late, as the decision was made more than one year before Miss X complained to us. There are no good reasons for us to exercise discretion to investigate.
9. In June 2024, an independent medical assessor considered Miss X’s medical needs. Based on the advice from the medical assessor, the Council decided to award Miss X Band 2 again (after she had previously been awarded a lower banding due to rent arrears). In its stage two complaint response, the Council explained to Miss X that it had awarded Band 2 based on a severe medical need to move and this was the highest possible band for medical priority. This is in line with the Council’s published Housing Allocations Policy. For this reason, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigating this banding decision.
10. If we were to investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of whether her accommodation is statutorily overcrowded, it is likely we would find fault causing the complainant injustice because the Council delayed completing its review of her banding on this point, causing Miss X uncertainty. The Council carried out an inspection of Miss X’s accommodation in October 2024. The inspecting officer assessed Miss X as statutorily overcrowded. The Council should have completed its banding review within 28 days (by the end of October), but it had still not completed this at the time Miss X complained to us.
11. In the Council’s stage two complaint response, it said the delay in completing the overcrowded banding review was due to a significant backlog of review decisions. The Council recently gave us details of an action plan that it had put in place to address this backlog. This needs time to take effect. Therefore, I am satisfied that no further service improvements are needed.
12. We therefore asked to the Council to consider remedying the injustice caused to Miss X by taking the following actions within one month:

• Apologise to Miss X for the delay in line with our Guidance on remedies - Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman;
• Pay Miss X £100 for distress and uncertainty; and,
• Complete the banding review and send Miss X its decision. If the Council decides to increase Miss X’s banding to Band 1, it should also consider a suitable remedy for the time she missed out on this award by having regard to our published Guidance on Remedies.

13. To its credit, the Council agreed to complete the above actions within one month.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We have upheld this complaint because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Miss X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman