Summary: The Council was at fault for delay completing a review of its decision Ms C did not qualify to join the housing register. The Council was at fault for failing to consider the information in Ms C’s review request as well as her application. The Council has agreed to apologise, backdate Ms C’s priority, and act to improve its services.

The complaint

1. Ms C complained that the Council wrongly decided she did not qualify to join the housing register. She also said the Council took too long to complete a review of its decision.
2. As a result, Ms C says she remains in overcrowded housing, where she has to share a room with her child.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the complaint and the information Ms C and the Council provided.
7. I referred to the Ombudsman's Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
8. Ms C and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Housing allocations

9. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises housing applicants, and its procedures for allocating properties.  All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
10. Housing applicants can ask the council to review a wide range of decisions about their applications, including decisions about their housing priority. Statutory guidance recommends Council’s complete reviews within eight weeks.
11. The Council awards eligible applicants priority from Band A (highest priority) to Band D (lowest priority). The Council decides priority within a band based on how long the applicant has been waiting in that band.
12. So far as is relevant to this complaint, the Council awards Band C to eligible applicants who are overcrowded by one bedroom.
13. Applicants the Council assesses as having no housing need are not allowed to join the housing register.

What happened

14. Ms C shares a bedroom with her child. She lives in a three-bedroom property with her parents and an adult sibling.
15. Ms C applied to join the Council’s housing register in January 2022. In her application, she said she was overcrowded.
16. Ms C did not include the details of the other adults who lived in the property on the form. She also recorded that her child lived at a different address.
17. As a result, the Council decided Ms C did not qualify to join the housing register. It sent her a decision in March 2022. The information from Ms C’s application was that she lived in a three-bedroom property alone and therefore had no housing need.
18. Ms C asked the Council to review this decision. In her review request, she said she shared a room with her child and lived with three other adults.
19. The Council completed its review in October 2023. It apologised for its delay completing the review. It said she had no housing need based on the information she provided in her application form.

My findings

20. There is no fault in the Council’s decision in March 2022 that Ms C did not qualify to join the housing register. Ms C did not provide complete and accurate information about her circumstances. She said she was sharing a room with her child. But she entered this information on the section of the form which asked for her landlord’s contact details. She entered her child’s address as different from her own. She did not include details of the other adults in the property, although the form asked her to do so.
21. However, Ms C provided new information when she asked for the review. The Council should have considered this, along with the application form, and asked Ms C for any other information or evidence it needed. Not to have done so was fault.
22. Had it considered her review request properly, on balance it is likely the Council would have decided Ms C was overcrowded by one bedroom. Under the Council’s allocations scheme, this means Ms C qualifies for Band C priority.
23. It took the Council 18 months to complete the review. The statutory guidance recommends eight weeks. This means it took the Council 16 months too long to complete the review. This was fault.
24. Had the Council completed the review on time and without fault, it would therefore have put Ms C into Band C in May 2022. This means Ms C has missed 21 months of time on the Council’s housing register. Although it is unlikely Ms C missed an offer of a property in this time, this denied her the chance to accrue waiting time and bid for housing. This is an injustice to Ms C.

Back to top

Agreed action

25. To remedy the injustice to Ms C from the faults I have identified, the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Ms C in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology
• Award Ms C with priority Band C with an effective date of 18 May 2022 after she submits a new application.
26. The Council should take this action within eight weeks of my final decision.
27. I have not recommended any service improvements about the Council’s delay completing the review. The Council already has a detailed plan in place to address its backlog and improve its service. It provided us an update of its performance against this plan in response to a complaint in January 2024.
28. Within eight weeks of my final decision, the Council should:
• Remind staff responsible for completing reviews of allocations decisions to ensure they consider and address any matters and evidence raised by the applicant in the review request as well as their application.
29. The Council should provide us with evidence it has completed these actions.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman