The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Miss X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation. We will not exercise discretion to consider parts of her complaint which relate to matters outside the 12-month period for receiving complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner.
The complaint
Miss X complained about the Council’s refusal to waive a 2-year restriction on applying for housing following her acceptance of a tenancy in 2020. She says she cannot live at her current address as it is affecting her mental health.
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) We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss X says she took her current council tenancy in 2020 following a bad experience with neighbours at her previous home which affected her mental health. Prior to the move she had 14 years waiting time on the housing register. She says she has had problems with neighbours at her new home and has left to stay with her parents.
Miss X applied for rehousing again but the Council told her that she was not eligible under its allocations policy to apply for 2 years after being housed. Miss X asked the Council to waive its policy restriction using its discretion. The Council told her that there was insufficient evidence that it should waive the policy in her case.
Miss X asked the Council to review her request in 2022 and it did so. The review confirmed that she had not provided sufficient evidence to make an exception to the policy. It confirmed that her previous 14 years on the list would not be applicable to any new application because she had accepted a tenancy since that time. Any new application which she submitted following the end of the restriction in November 2022 would have to be based on her current housing needs and not her status prior to her being rehoused in 2020.
We will not consider any of the issues related to her move to her current tenancy in 2020 and an application to move then. It was reasonable for Miss X to complain to us within 12 months of this and there is no evidence to suggest she could not have complained to us sooner.
When considering complaints, we may not question the merits of the decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Councils’ officers or members. This means we will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions. Miss X was given a review of the original decision but the Council did not consider that the case warranted an exception to its policy.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Miss X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation. We will not exercise discretion to consider parts of her complaint which relate to matters outside the 12-month period for receiving complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman