Portsmouth City Council (202451326)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202451326

Portsmouth City Council

16 September 2025

Our approach

What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. The Ombudsman must determine whether a complaint comes within their jurisdiction. The Ombudsman seeks to resolve disputes wherever possible but cannot investigate complaints that fall outside of this.

In deciding whether a complaint falls within their jurisdiction, the Ombudsman will carefully consider all the evidence provided by the parties and the circumstances of the case.

The complaint

1. This complaint is about how the landlord handled the resident’s application for a priority transfer.

Background

2. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. She requested a priority transfer to another property in October 2024. This was based on concerns about her safety and that of her children.
3. She made a complaint on 24 January 2025. She said she was unhappy with the progress of her application.
4. The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 7 February 2025. It said it had presented her case to a panel on 9 January 2025, but there was no panel decision yet. It explained that even if the panel approved the move, a priority move was not an emergency move, and it could take months to be offered another property. It recommended that she continue looking for a mutual exchange to expedite a move, and signposted her to services for emergency accommodation if needed.
5. It issued a stage 2 response on 14 March 2025. It said the panel had concluded there was insufficient evidence to approve a priority transfer. It said if the resident could provide any further evidence it could assess whether it could refer the case back to the panel for review. It said the panel had assessed the case in line with its policies, and it encouraged her to keep working with her housing officer to identify a suitable mutual exchange.
6. The resident was unhappy with the response, so referred her complaint to us. She said the landlord had declined her application for a move on safety grounds, and it would take a further 6 weeks to consider another application based on medical grounds. She said she had tried everything to find another property, but had been unsuccessful.
7. The resident’s application for a priority move was granted based on medical grounds in June 2025, following a further panel meeting.

Determination (jurisdictional decision)

8. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
9. After carefully considering all the evidence, I have determined that the complaint, as set out above, is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Reasons

10. This complaint is about the resident’s application for a priority move. The application was for rehousing under Part 6 of the Housing Act 1996, which sets out the circumstances in which local authorities must give applicants reasonable preference when making decisions about property allocations. The criteria include applications based on the grounds of health and welfare.
11. Paragraph 41(d) of the Scheme says that we can only consider complaints about local authorities in England which relate to their provision or management of social housing. This does not include complaints about applications for rehousing – including assessment of such applications or a decision that the application does not qualify for reasonable preference. These matters fall within the jurisdiction of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO), who can consider complaints about applications under Part 6 of the Housing Act 1996.
12. As such, this complaint is not within our jurisdiction. The resident may therefore wish to contact the LGSCO for assistance with her complaint.