The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s priority on the housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains the Council ignored her evidence and gave her low priority on the housing register. She says her daughters should have their own rooms.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes the medical evidence and the Council’s decisions about the housing application. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.
My assessment
The allocations policy says people can only bid for properties if they have at least 100 points. The policy also says the Council will award zero points to private tenants who lack one bedroom. The policy says the Council will award low medical priority when someone’s home causes some medical problems but the issues are not life threatening or making the condition worse.
Ms X lives in a two bedroom privately rented flat with four children. She needs an extra bedroom. She submitted information about back and shoulder problems, and details about other medical issues.
The Council assessed Ms X’s housing application. It decided she needs another bedroom but awarded no points. It awarded low medical priority and 50 points. Ms X cannot bid for properties because she has less than 100 points. Ms X says the Council ignored and lost her evidence and has not considered all her circumstances.
I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The decisions the Council has made are consistent with the policy. The Council’s decision letters show it has considered Ms X’s medical evidence and explained in detail why it has awarded low medical priority. Ms X provided a lot of information about her health but if she thinks key information has been lost she can resubmit it to the Council. In addition, there is nothing to suggest the Council is unaware of her general circumstances such as the overcrowding.
I appreciate Ms X thinks she should have higher medical priority but it is not our role to decide what the priority should be. We can only consider if there has been fault in the process and I see no evidence of fault.
Ms X says she has recently been referred for physiotherapy. The Council has already invited Ms X to submit new medical evidence or to notify the Council if there are changes in her circumstances. Ms X can tell the Council about the referral but it would be for the Council to decide if it affects her priority.
Final decision
I will not investigate this because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman