The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the time the complainant has been waiting for a larger home. This is because the Council has provided a fair and proportionate response.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains the Council has not provided a home which is large enough for her needs. She wants the Council to provide a larger home.
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 the Council has provided a fair response. (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 complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Ms X to comment on a draft of this decision.
My assessment
Ms X moved into her current home in 2007 with her son and daughter. She says she was told she would get a larger home when her daughter became ten. Ms X is still in the same flat and her children are 17 and 16. She complained to the Council that she had not moved.
The Council said Ms X applied to the housing register in 2012. It said it made a mistake in 2012 and wrongly closed the application in October 2012. The Council said it sent a letter to Ms X inviting her to challenge the closure decision but she did not submit a review request. The Council went on to explain that Ms X applied to re-join the register in 2018 and did not refer to the previous application. The Council confirmed Ms X has had a live application since 2018 and is registered for a three bedroom home.
The Council apologised and backdated the application to 2012 because it should not have closed it in 2012. The Council checked that, despite the error, Ms X has not missed an offer of housing. It established she had not. The Council also invited Ms X to apply for medical priority as she indicated she has some health issues. The Council also explained that when there are children of different sexes, an extra bedroom is required when a child becomes ten, but this does not mean a new home will be offered at that point. The person still needs to bid and be the applicant with the most priority.
I will not investigate this complaint because the Council has provided a fair response. It apologised for the error in 2012 and backdated the current application. It also checked the error had not meant Ms X lost out on an offer of housing. This is a fair and proportionate response. It recognises that the Council made a mistake but also takes into account that Ms X did not ask for a review in 2012, did not try to make any bids for six years and did not reapply until 2018. In addition, the Council has explained that a child turning ten does not mean the Council will offer a larger home immediately.
We are not an appeal body and have no power to get Ms X re-housed or to ask the Council to offer a larger home outside of the normal bidding system. Ms X will need to continue to bid but she now has more priority due to the backdating.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because the Council has provided an appropriate response.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman