Housing archive 2017-2018


Archive has 703 results

  • Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (17 019 833)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 29-Mar-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B's complaint that the Council delayed in processing her right to buy application. It is reasonable to expect Ms B to use the procedure set out in the Housing Act 1985 for delay in the right to buy process.

  • London Borough of Islington (17 013 882)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 29-Mar-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman have not investigated Mr X's complaint about the Council's handling of he and his family's 'right to buy' application. This is because it would have been reasonable for them to have taken the matter to court.

  • London Borough of Southwark (17 019 009)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 29-Mar-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X's late complaint about the Council's handling of his right to buy application. If Mr X disagreed with the Council's decision it would have been reasonable for him to take the matter to court.

  • Liverpool City Council (16 019 279)

    Statement Upheld Allocations 28-Mar-2018

    Summary: The Council when applying limits under its housing allocations policy failed to properly consider the exceptional circumstances created by harassment. However, through its review it restored a housing applicant to the same priority banding previously awarded resolving the complaint.

  • Coventry City Council (17 011 955)

    Statement Not upheld Allocations 28-Mar-2018

    Summary: Ms X says the Council is at fault in its handling of her request for priority need for housing on medical grounds. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault by the Council but he recommended the Council's housing panel consider Ms X's circumstances to see if any exception should be made to allow to her to bid for accommodation more suitable for her needs. The Council agreed to do so.

  • Braintree District Council (17 011 015)

    Statement Not upheld Allocations 28-Mar-2018

    Summary: The complainant says the Council has not properly considered medical and welfare information supplied in support of her request for additional priority for her housing application so she can bid for three bedroom accommodation. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault by the Council and he has therefore ended his investigation of this matter.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (17 002 895)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 28-Mar-2018

    Summary: Mr X complains there was unreasonable delay deciding his partner's homelessness application and her temporary accommodation was unsuitable. We found the homelessness decision was delayed unreasonably but there was no fault with the decisions it reached about accommodation. The Council apologised for the delay which was a reasonable remedy to the complaint.

  • Birmingham City Council (17 010 216)

    Statement Upheld Allocations 27-Mar-2018

    Summary: The Council acted with fault in giving incorrect housing application advice for which it apologised and awarded appropriate backdating so the applicant did not lose out on priority for housing.

  • London Borough of Newham (17 009 688)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 27-Mar-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B's complaint that his temporary accommodation is not suitable. This is because it was reasonable to expect Mr B to use his right of appeal to the county court and to ask the Council to review his complaint. It is unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman would achieve more for Mr B.

  • London Borough of Hounslow (17 016 571)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 27-Mar-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B's complaint that the Council has failed to offer him a property. This is because Mr B's complaint about what happened before January 2017 is late and there are not good reasons to investigate it now and it is reasonable to expect Mr B to ask the Council to review its decision on his current housing application if he is not happy with it.

;