Archive has 694 results
-
London Borough of Southwark (18 015 936)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 11-Mar-2020
Summary: The complainant says the Council delayed deciding if it owed him a duty to house him following homelessness. This delayed his right to a review of the suitability of his property. The complainant says he suffered bed bugs, vermin infestations, unclean living areas and the loss of heating and hot water due to boiler failures. The Council says it oversaw the property provider’s action to eradicate bed bugs, vermin and the repair and replacement of the boiler. The Council says the complainant did not ask for a review of suitability when he gained that right following the Council’s decision it owed him a housing duty. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault for the delay in deciding it owed a housing duty which delayed the right to a review and the opportunity of improving circumstances through bidding on other properties.
-
Luton Borough Council (19 003 941)
Statement Not upheld Allocations 11-Mar-2020
Summary: Mrs X complains the Council awarded the wrong priority banding meaning she was unable to bid on houses and has delayed a move. Mrs X’s priority banding is correct based on her current, assessed needs and it has amended the mobility code. The mobility code does not affect priority and so has not prevented a move. The Council has used its professional judgement to make the decision only ground floor accommodation is suitable for Mrs X but there is no evidence of fault in how it reached that decision.
-
Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (19 004 717)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 11-Mar-2020
Summary: Miss X complained about the Council preventing her from applying for vacant houses and limiting her bids to certain types of property on the housing waiting list. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
-
Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (19 018 201)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 11-Mar-2020
Summary: Miss X complained the Council placed her family in the wrong priority band on its housing register. We will not consider this complaint because it is unlikely that investigation by us would achieve a different outcome. The Council amended the family’s priority banding through its appeals procedure, and it is unlikely we would find fault in how it came to its most recent decision.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 11-Mar-2020
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to consider his mental health conditions when deciding his priority for housing allocation and that it delayed in responding to his complaint. The Ombudsman will not consider Mr X’s complaint about his priority banding further because it is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate now. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate the Council’s complaint handling alone.
-
London Borough of Ealing (18 007 339)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 10-Mar-2020
Summary: Mr B complains about how the Council has handled his housing situation from when he was homeless in January 2018 and generally how it has treated him since then. There was fault in the Council’s correspondence with Mr B about his arrears but that has not caused significant injustice to Mr B.
-
Birmingham City Council (19 004 890)
Statement Not upheld Allocations 10-Mar-2020
Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr B’s housing and homelessness applications.
-
London Borough of Southwark (19 008 153)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 09-Mar-2020
Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s failure to give her any medical priority for her housing application. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
-
London Borough of Barnet (19 009 682)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 09-Mar-2020
Summary: Ms X complained about the Council refusing her application for rehousing. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
-
London Borough of Ealing (19 013 504)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 09-Mar-2020
Summary: Miss X complains about the way the Council handled her homelessness case causing her to live in unsuitable accommodation with her children. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council as it kept Miss X in unsuitable property for too long and did not review her personalised housing plan. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X and provide guidance to staff to remedy the injustice caused.