Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s decision regarding his housing application. In particular, Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision that he does not qualify for another bedroom.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the medical evidence provided to us by Mr X and the Council, the allocations policy, and the housing application decision. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council’s allocations policy says a couple can bid for one bedroom accommodation or for two bedroom properties which are above ground level. The Council will award an extra bedroom when the applicant provides evidence of permanent night-time care provided by a non-family member.
6. Mr X lives in a three bedroom privately rented property with his wife. Mr X is worried his tenancy might not be renewed and, if asked to leave, they would struggle to find alternative accommodation.
7. Mr & Mrs X are on the housing register and can bid for one and two bedroom properties as described above. Mr X says they need an extra bedroom due to his wife’s health needs and, ideally, ground floor accommodation with access to a private garden. Mr X asked the Council to increase the bedroom need; he provided supporting evidence including a report which recommended ground floor two bedroom accommodation.
8. The Council considered all the supporting evidence and the allocations policy. The subsequent decision shows the Council considered the reports in relation to bedroom need and a garden, but decided the issues are not severe enough to warrant an extra bedroom. The Council noted there was no evidence that a non-family member provides permanent over-night care. The Council repeated that Mr X can bid for some two bedroom properties.
9. Mr X disagrees with the decision and referred to evidence he submitted showing the severity of his wife’s needs.
10. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision and it is clear his wife has complex needs. But, we can only intervene if there is fault in the way a council makes a decision and I have not seen any suggestion of fault. I have considered all the evidence Mr X submitted to the Council, the Council’s assessment of that evidence and the policy, and I can see that the resulting decision flows from the combination of all the evidence.
11. We do not act as an appeal body and it is not my role to re-make the decision, however much Mr X may disagree with it.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman