London Borough of Redbridge (07A03275)
Homelessness Maladministration causing injustice
23 March 2009
The London Borough of Redbridge failed to take sufficient account of a man’s hearing disability when dealing with his homelessness application. The Ombudsman said “…the faults I have identified in this matter demonstrate a failure by the Council to comply with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 – to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to enable disabled people to access services.” The man had to live in temporary accommodation for two years longer than necessary as a result of the Council’s failures.
‘Mr Bennett’ (not his real name for legal reasons) complained about the way the Council dealt with his needs as a disabled person when handling his homelessness application between July 2006 and October 2007, despite its response to an earlier complaint he made about the same issue in October 2006.
The Ombudsman found that the Council was at fault for:
- interviewing Mr Bennett without a British Sign Language (BSL) interpreter on two occasions (30 June 2006 and 11 July 2007) even though he was profoundly deaf and could not communicate effectively without a BSL interpreter;
- repeatedly failing to provide a textphone facility so that he could contact the Council’s Housing Advice Centre, despite a previous complaint from him about this in October 2006 and the Council’s undertaking to remedy the problem – the Council reviewed its arrangements at the time for housing applicants who are unable to communicate by telephone, but still failed to introduce a textphone facility in a timely fashion;
- delaying unreasonably for 12 months in providing the promised training for frontline staff on disability awareness;
- failing to comply with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 that require the Council, as a service provider, to make '”reasonable adjustments” to enable disabled people to access services;
- delaying unreasonably from August 2006 to November 2007 in processing Mr Bennett’s housing application, partly as a result of the above faults.
Remedy
The Council had already paid Mr Bennett £750 for failing to provide an interpreter and a textphone facility. Its staff at the Housing Advice Centre had attended Deaf Awareness Training and a textphone facility had been provided, which the Ombudsman welcomed. The Council said that it had also reviewed its arrangements for communication with service users and implemented the necessary changes to ensure it complied with the latest Disability Discrimination Act requirements.
In addition, the Ombudsman also considered that the Council should:
- pay Mr Bennett an additional £500 for the inconvenience and uncertainty of living in nightly-let accommodation for two years longer than necessary;
- remind all staff of the importance of recording service users’ special communication needs and checking these records before attempting to contact them; and
- remind all staff of the importance of complying with its Interpretation and Translation policy.
LGO satisfied with Council's response: 16 September 2009
Date Updated: 10/12/09