The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the priority awarded on the Council’s housing register. The Council considered its discretion to award extra priority and back-dated Ms X’s priority date to increase her chance of successfully bidding. There is nothing further we could achieve.
The complaint
Ms X complained the Council wrongly removed priority from her housing register application and then failed to take the action promised after she complained. She says this means she continues to live in unsuitable temporary accommodation.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide: we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms X complained that the Council wrongly changed the priority date on her housing register application when the family became homeless. After she complained to the Council, its independent adjudicator said it had been wrong to do so, although noted the Council did not agree with them. They recommended the Council restore the original priority date of 2 November 2021. There was a delay in it doing so, which we have investigated previously.
The independent adjudicator also said that, if the family had missed out on an offer of housing, the Council should consider using its discretion to increase their priority to ensure the success of their next bid. Ms X complains the Council has not done this.
In its complaint response dated 4 April 2024, the Council said it had exercised its discretion to increase the family’s priority by backdating their priority date. It told us the independent adjudicator had not required it to increase the priority band.
The Council told us Ms X had not missed out on an offer of housing in 2022 to 2023. It said no suitable four bedroom flats were advertised in that period. One four bedroom house advertised in February 2023 but Ms X could not be considered for that because she placed a bid on a different property that week. It added the family would have been successful in securing suitable three or four bedroom accommodation in the last 12 months if Ms X had bid on maisonettes and flats, not just on houses, which are in short supply.
We will not investigate this complaint further. Although the Council said Ms X had not missed out on an offer of housing in 2022 to 2023, it exercised its discretion, as recommended by the independent adjudicator, and decided it was sufficient to back-date the priority date. We cannot direct the Council to award a higher priority band, so there is nothing further we could achieve by investigating Further, the Council said it had completed a fresh medical assessment in early June, after Ms X provided updated medical evidence. Although, Ms X has not formally requested this, it has agreed to complete a review of the suitability of the family’s temporary accommodation in light of the new medical assessment. This is appropriate action for the Council to take.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is nothing further we could achieve.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman