this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Mr X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Mr X complained about the assessment of his housing application and the award of medical priority. He says his current temporary accommodation is unsuitable for his mental health needs and he should be given high priority to move immediately.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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 the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended) 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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X moved to his current temporary accommodation in February 2020. He says it is shared with other applicants and that it is a cause of stress which prompted psychotic episodes late in 2020 and in 2021. He says it is no longer suitable for him to share and he should be moved to separate accommodation immediately. He did not request a suitability of accommodation review when it was allocated in 2020 and he had not suffered the episodes at the time.
The Council awarded him 40 medical points on its initial assessment of his case. He asked for a review of the medical award and provided medical evidence from NHS practitioners. The Council’s medical assessor did not increase his points but confirmed a Band C medical priority because he is sharing facilities and has mental health needs. The award letter advised him that he could ask for a review of the award decision within 21 days but no request was received.
We will not uphold a complaint if the council has followed proper procedures, relevant legislation and guidance and taken account of all the information provided, even if the applicant believes that the council should have given more priority to the application to move. It may be the case that, although they need to move urgently, there are other applicants who have an even greater need.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Mr X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman