Housing archive 2019-2020


Archive has 673 results

  • Westminster City Council (19 013 704)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 30-Jan-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the suitability of her temporary accommodation. This is because the complaint is late and there is no reason Miss X could not have complained much sooner.

  • Leicester City Council (18 017 489)

    Statement Not upheld Homelessness 29-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr B complains about how the Council has dealt with his family’s housing situation. The Council has not rehoused them and as a result they live in overcrowded housing that is not suitable for his mother’s disability. There was no fault by the Council. It has properly assessed the housing needs, but no suitable properties have become available.

  • South Gloucestershire Council (19 013 752)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 29-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr X complains that a decision by the Council in 2012 was incorrect. Mr X also complains that Mrs X will potentially be made homeless by the Council. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint as there is no current injustice to address.

  • West Lindsey District Council (19 009 607)

    Statement Not upheld Private housing 28-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council asked her to accept a criminal caution for not complying with the conditions of an Abatement Notice the Council issued under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. I have discontinued my investigation because Mrs X had a right of appeal against conditions of the notice and legal proceedings remain ongoing.

  • Westminster City Council (18 019 387)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 27-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council handled his housing applications and the delay in providing him a decision. Mr X says this caused him uncertainty as he continued to live in unsuitable accommodation. From the evidence provided, the Ombudsman finds fault with the Council and has made recommendations to remedy the injustice caused which the Council has agreed to.

  • London Borough of Harrow (19 006 843)

    Statement Upheld Other 24-Jan-2020

    Summary: The Council was at fault, because it did not make the correct payments for two properties it was leasing, and the complainant was put to unnecessary time and trouble in resolving the matter. The Council has now paid the correct amounts and offered a financial remedy to reflect the complainant’s time and trouble, but has agreed to increase its offer marginally upon recommendation from the Ombudsman.

  • Herefordshire Council (19 007 470)

    Statement Not upheld Private housing 24-Jan-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman found no fault by the Council on Mr and Mrs K’s complaint about the way it acted following a report about the condition of the flat they let. The Council did not act more favourably towards the tenant, nor supported him to avoid getting evicted. Most of the remainder of their complaint is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction as they exercised their right of appeal to a tribunal.

  • London Borough of Brent (19 009 310)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 24-Jan-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about the suitability of accommodation the Council offered to discharge its homelessness duty. It is reasonable to expect Ms B to have used her right of appeal to the county court on a point of law.

  • Stoke-on-Trent City Council (19 015 820)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Private housing 24-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr L complained a Council housing officer shared his confidential information with someone making a complaint against him. He also complained about the housing officer’s behaviour for 18 months. The Ombudsman cannot consider Mr L’s complaint as both matters related to an issue considered in court.

  • East Suffolk Council (19 014 448)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 24-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s failure to give sufficient priority to her housing application. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings