The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant cannot join the housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, disagrees with the Council’s decision that she cannot join the housing register. She says her flat is dangerous and she needs to move.
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)) We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council. This includes the housing application and medical evidence. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mrs X made in reply to a draft of this decision.
My assessment
The Council’s housing allocation policy says people cannot join the housing register if they have no housing need.
Mrs X lives in a first floor, two bedroom flat with her child. She says the flat is dangerous because her child has no sense of danger and there is a balcony. She also says there is inadequate air flow and the Council, her landlord, has failed to carry out repairs to some of the door and window locks.
Mrs X applied to join the housing register and provided medical evidence about her child. The Council’s medical adviser assessed the medical evidence and said the child could be protected by using locks on the balcony door.
The Council rejected the housing application because Mrs X has no housing need as defined by the policy. The flat is the correct size and locks can be used to keep the child away from the balcony. The Council noted the lock had been replaced and window restrictors were being fitted.
I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council assessed the application correctly by considering the policy and the medical evidence. Its decision that Mrs X cannot join the register flows from the evidence and policy so there is no reason to start an investigation. We are not an appeal body and have no power to change the Council’s decision. I can only consider how the Council assessed the application and there is no suggestion of fault in the way this was done.
Mrs X says the Council has failed to properly carry out repairs to the window locks. This, however, is a matter she needs to pursue with the Council to ensure locks are correctly fitted. This is an issue she needs to pursue as a disrepair issue with her landlord rather than a complaint about her housing application. She could also raise the air flow with her landlord. We cannot investigate any complaint about the way the Council has carried out repairs because we have no power to investigate a council when it is acting as a landlord.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman