Bristol City Council (19 007 854)

Statement Upheld Allocations 24-Feb-2020

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to deal properly with her application for housing. There was no delay in the time taken for the Council to award Ms X housing priority and no fault in the way the Council carried out a suitability review of the property it offered her. There was fault when the Council failed to consider medical evidence Ms X submitted but this did not cause her an injustice. Ms X also complained the Council breached data protection legislation but I will not investigate this. This is because matters about data breaches are best left to the Information Commissioner’s Office.

London Borough of Camden (19 008 244)

Statement Upheld Allocations 24-Feb-2020

Summary: Miss X complained the Council delayed her daughter’s medical needs assessment in relation to her housing allocation priority. The Council was at fault. The impact of the delays resulted in Miss X and her family missing out on suitable properties. The Council has agreed to backdate Miss X’s priority to remedy her injustice.

London Borough of Havering (19 015 402)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 21-Feb-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to reject an application for inclusion on the housing register. This is because it is unlikely he would find fault by the Council in the way it made its decision

Leicester City Council (19 014 629)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council house sales and leaseholders 20-Feb-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s administration of a right to buy application. This is because the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council and we are satisfied with the action it has taken.

Birmingham City Council (19 018 736)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 20-Feb-2020

Summary: Mr X complains his property has been damaged due to the disrepair of the neighbouring property which is Council owned. The Ombudsman cannot investigate as he has no remit to investigate the actions of the Council as a social housing landlord.

Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council (19 007 212)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 20-Feb-2020

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s offers of temporary accommodation. He said he had to sleep in his car in 2019 after leaving accommodation offered to him. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. It was reasonable for Mr X to ask for a review of the suitability of the temporary accommodation offered to him.

London Borough of Redbridge (18 003 305)

Statement Upheld Private housing 19-Feb-2020

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to take appropriate action when she reported damp and mould in her privately rented accommodation. The Council was at fault for not ensuring the landlord carried out repairs and not considering enforcement action when a category 1 hazard was identified. It was also at fault for not making enquiries when Miss X said she was homeless because it was not reasonable for her to continue living there. It should apologise and make a payment to her to reflect the distress caused as a result of living in unsuitable accommodation.

Epping Forest District Council (19 007 387)

Statement Upheld Allocations 19-Feb-2020

Summary: Ms X complained the Council decided the family needed a property without stairs and delayed allowing her to bid for properties. The Council is at fault for giving too much weight to the medical adviser’s comments and not considering all relevant factors. It agreed to apologise and make a payment to Ms X for the delays caused.

London Borough of Newham (19 008 332)

Statement Upheld Homelessness 18-Feb-2020

Summary: The Council was at fault because it placed a wrong address on an appendix to a letter accepting a duty to accommodate a resident. The Council also failed to contact the resident to review his situation. There was no injustice to the resident from these faults. The resident did not contact the Council for 18 months about the homeless application and it would have been reasonable for him to follow up the matter at the time.

London Borough of Croydon (19 010 862)

Statement Not upheld Homelessness 18-Feb-2020

Summary: Mr X complains the Council is acting unreasonably by saying he does not qualify for its housing register on residence grounds as it was responsible for him moving out of the Borough in 2016. There is no evidence the Council placed Mr X out of the Borough in 2016.