The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Mrs X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Mrs X complained about the Council failing to accept that her home is statutorily overcrowded and that she should be given addition al priority on her housing application. She also says that it rejected her medical evidence for further priority and that her daughter’s contributions to the community have need been recognised.
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 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 it would be reasonable for the person to ask for an organisation review or appeal.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A (6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mrs X asked the Council in March 2021 to assess her home for statutory overcrowding. She says there are 7 persons living in a three-bedroom flat and that this must be overcrowding. The Council assessed her family as being 6.5 persons under the definition in s.10 of the Housing Act 1985. Family members are discounted or given only half-unit recognition if under 10 years old. The Council also informed her that any living room can be identified as sleeping accommodation under the provisions of the Act. Because the space standard is 7.5 for her home and the family unit is 6.5 this does not amount to statutory overcrowding.
Mrs X’s medical information had not been submitted when she made her formal complaint so we are unable to comment on the Council’s assessment of this. She has a right to ask for a review if her medical submission does not meet the level for additional priority.
Mrs X had not submitted any evidence of voluntary community contributions when she made her formal complaint. The Council’s housing allocations policy has specific requirements about voluntary contributions and refers only to applicants involved in housing related voluntary work in the borough. Mrs X will need to provide this if she wishes to have her application re-assessed.
The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application/ a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme. We recognise that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. We may not find fault with a council for failing to re-house someone, if it has prioritised applicants and allocated properties according to its published lettings scheme policy.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Mrs X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman