Meet Jane

Jane has a medical condition which affects her mobility. 

She uses a walking stick and sometimes a wheelchair. 

She lives in a third floor flat with no lift.

Jane applied to join her council’s housing register. Her current home was affecting her mental health because she started to struggle to get up the stairs – causing her to sometimes spend long periods indoors or even stay with friends away from the home.

The barriers Jane faced

Delay registering her initial housing application
(Case reference: 22 007 825)

The council took around four months to assess Jane’s application. We expect councils to carry out assessments within eight weeks. It accepted Jane onto its housing register, awarding her the second highest level of priority on its banding scheme, on the grounds of her medical condition.

Incorrect medical assessment
(Case reference: 22 014 655)

Jane believed she should have been awarded the highest priority (band A), given when someone’s accommodation makes their condition substantially worse. She believed her mental health was deteriorating living in the property.

She asked the council to review its banding decision and gave it an assessment from an Occupational Therapist (OT). This report recommended a move to a ground floor flat or one with a lift. It stated she had “extreme difficulty” using the stairs, could not access the bath or shower, and even with major adaptations the property could not be suitable.

The council referred the information to its medical adviser. It then upheld its decision on priority and said Jane did not provide sufficient evidence that her condition was made worse by her home.

However, the council had not explained why it preferred its medical adviser’s opinion over the OT’s. It should not have simply adopted the opinion of a third-party medical adviser. There was also another significant delay.

Years in unsuitable accommodation
(Case reference: 22 004 110)

The council eventually awarded Jane priority band A while it looked for a suitable property. Band A applicants have an urgent need to move and should not be left on that band indefinitely.

However, Jane spent four years in the same home. Over that time, she made bids on properties and the council offered her seven. But five of those were unsuitable because they were not wheelchair accessible, and she did not get to view the other two.

The council said it had very few wheelchair accessible properties available during the period. The council should have reviewed Jane’s case every six months. It accepted it did not do this.

The impact of remaining in unsuitable accommodation for so long limited Jane’s independence and had a significant impact on her physical health and emotional wellbeing.

Advice for councils – getting the basics right

In the absence of sufficient housing stock to meet needs, councils must make sure the limited stock they do have is allocated fairly. A Disabled person, probably already facing a longer wait for suitable housing than a non-disabled applicant, should not be further disadvantaged because of their disability.

Good administration of housing allocations means:

• making prompt and accurate assessments of applications for social housing and associated medical assessments
• carrying out reviews promptly, and giving reasoned decisions which reference the relevant parts of the allocations scheme
• making accountable decisions about medical priority which do not simply adopt the opinion of a third party adviser, but reflect all the evidence and the allocations scheme
• applying the allocations scheme to individual cases fairly and accurately and avoiding blanket assertions of what the policy says without direct reference to those policies
• ensuring housing and social services can work together to identify housing needs and share information