Summary: Mr B complains the Council did not supported him to secure suitable accommodation. The Council was at fault for a delay in assessing medical information Mr B submitted with his housing application in November 2017. The Council’s delay caused uncertainty for Mr B. The Council had already remedied some of the injustice to Mr B and has agreed to take action to remedy the outstanding injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr B complained the Council has not supported him to secure suitable accommodation. He also complained the Council did not help him to get a laptop and a passport.
2. Mr B says he had to live in unsuitable accommodation for longer than he should have because of the Council’s actions.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have investigated the Council’s actions relating to a change of circumstances form submitted to the housing department in November 2017.
4. I have not investigated matters before November 2017 because Mr B could have brought these to the Ombudsman sooner. I have not investigated Mr B’s complaint about the Council not helping him to get a passport or a laptop because these issues date back to August 2017.
5. I have not investigated matters about the alleged mice infestation in Mr B’s accommodation because he is taking legal action against his landlord.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

6. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
7. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended). I exercised discretion to start the investigation from 2017 because Mr B did not find out until 2019 that the medical information he submitted in November 2017 was not assessed at the time.
8. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered:
• Mr B’s complaint and the information he provided;
• documents supplied by the Council;
• relevant legislation and guidelines; and
• the Council’s policies and procedures.
10. Mr B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on a draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and Guidance

11. A council that is a local housing authority (LHA) must have an allocation scheme for deciding priorities and allocating accommodation. The scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants who fall within reasonable preference categories. (Housing Act 1996 s.166A (1,3) and s.167 (1, 2))
12. The Housing Act 1996 s.166A sets out the reasonable preference categories. These are:
• people who are homeless and eligible under the Housing Acts 1985 and 1996.
• people occupying insanitary or overcrowded housing or living in unsatisfactory housing conditions.
• people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds.
• people who need to move to a particular locality and a failure to move would cause hardship to themselves or to others.
13. An LHA may give 'additional preference' to applicants within the reasonable preference categories, provided they have urgent housing needs.

Ealing Allocations Scheme

14. All homeseekers have to complete an online application to join the Housing Register. If the Council is satisfied the homeseeker is an eligible person, they will be registered. If the homeseeker is not eligible the Council will notify them in writing, giving the reasons for the decision, and the right to ask for a review of this decision.
15. The Council will assess all eligible people and place them in the appropriate ‘bedroom category’ and in one of the four Priority Bandings in order of date of registration.
16. The Priority Bandings are:
• Band A: Emergency and Top Priority Members.
• Band B: Members with an urgent need to move.
• Band C: Members with an identified housing need.
• Band D: All other members
17. The Council will ask homeseekers who say that they have an illness or disability, which is affected by their current home, or who may be vulnerable due to physical or mental health grounds, and in need of settled accommodation, to complete an online application for medical assessment. These cases are referred to the Medical Adviser for assessment and recommendations which will inform the Council’s decision.
18. On receiving the recommendation, the Council will decide which band the person should be placed in:
• Band A: Emergency Medical to be recommended where the homeseeker, or a member of the household, has a life threatening condition which is seriously affected by their housing; or homeless households in emergency temporary accommodation which is unsuitable due to a severe medical condition.
• Band B: Urgent Medical to be recommended where the current housing conditions have a major adverse effect on the medical condition of the homeseeker or a member of the household.
• Band C: Medical Need to be recommended where the current housing conditions are having an adverse effect on the medical condition of the homeseeker, or a member of the household, which creates a particular need for them to move.
19. Where a homeseeker, or a member of the household, has a substantial and permanent physical disability, a referral should be made to the Housing Occupational Therapist (HOT). The HOT will visit and carry out a full assessment of the disability and housing needs.

Back to top

What happened

20. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
21. Mr B presented as homeless to a neighbouring authority. This authority placed him in temporary interim accommodation in Ealing while it assessed his homelessness application. The authority found Mr B to be intentionally homeless and gave him notice of eviction.
22. Mr B contacted Ealing Council in January 2016 because he was going to be evicted. He explained he was severely sight impaired and because of this could not read or write. Social care agreed to pay for Mr B’s accommodation from February 2016 while it assessed his needs and eligibility for services.
23. Social care supported Mr B to make a housing application in October 2016. In December 2016, the Council’s housing department wrote to Mr B to him to tell him that his application was not successful. It told him how to ask for the decision to be reviewed.
24. Mr B’s social worker spoke to the housing department in August 2017 about his housing priority. The housing department advised that no medical information was provided with his October 2016 application. It told Mr B’s social worker to complete a medical form and it would reassess his application.
25. Mr B agreed his social worker could contact his GP and consultant to ask for evidence to support his housing application. His social worker completed a change of circumstances and medical form for Mr B in November 2017.
26. In January 2018 there was an incident between Mr B and another resident. Mr B’s landlord was going to evict him. Mr B’s social worker spoke to his landlord and persuaded them not to evict him while the Council looked for alternative accommodation. Mr B told the Council he would not move to another temporary accommodation. The Council found a new placement for Mr B that met his needs and offered to help Mr B move. Mr B refused to move.
27. Mr B complained that his social worker was moving him to a different borough following his eviction and the Council had put him in accommodation that was unsuitable because of his disability. Social care responded to Mr B’s complaint. Social care explained Mr B’s social worker had persuaded his landlord not to evict him. It said it could source alternative accommodation that could meet his needs, but it could not guarantee this would be in the area he wanted.
28. Mr B complained to the Council in March 2018 that his accommodation was not suitable for people with disabilities. He told the Council he did not have access to a cooker or a washing machine and struggled to use the bathroom.
29. Social care replied that it had assessed his needs and his accommodation and found he was capable of functioning safely in his accommodation. It told Mr B there was a shared working cooker it had offered to adapt for his visual impairment, but he had declined. Social care said it had offered him a microwave and was awaiting his response.
30. In July 2018 social care spoke to Mr B about claiming housing benefit. Mr B said he did not want to do this because it would affect his chances of getting social housing. Social care explained this was not the case, but Mr B insisted he would not apply for housing benefit.
31. In February 2019, the Council’s housing department assessed Mr B’s medical form and awarded him band C. The Council backdated Mr B’s housing priority to December 2017.
32. Mr B complained to social care about the cleanliness and disrepair in his temporary accommodation. Social care explained that he could find himself a one-bedroom flat and claim housing benefit. Mr B said he would never do this. He said he should be in band A or B for housing. Mr B’s social worker applied and succeeded in getting Mr B’s banding increase to band B.
33. In May 2019, Mr B’s social worker explained to Mr B how to bid and advised, “if you bid every week you should be re-housed within 3-6 months”.
34. The housing department advised Mr B’s social worker in June 2019 that Mr B had not made any bids. She contacted Mr B to ask if he needed support to bid for properties. Mr B replied saying he had not bid because there was nothing suitable and he should be in band A. His carer requested he was moved temporary accommodation whilst he was bidding on properties. The Council told Mr B it had offered him support to find alternative accommodation, but he needed to apply for housing benefit which he refused to do.
35. Mr B complained to the Council in June 2019 that his accommodation was unsuitable, and the medical form submitted in November 2017 was not assessed at the time.
36. Social care spoke to Mr B about his complaint in July and responded in writing in August 2019. Social care reminded Mr B it had offered him alternative temporary accommodation when he expressed concerns about his accommodation, but he declined to move. It said his social worker had given him advice about moving on from his accommodation which he declined, and that he had not contacted the housing department as suggested.
37. In September 2019 Mr B’s MP asked the Council to tell Mr B about the support available to move him into suitable accommodation. The Council responded stating it had overlooked the medical information Mr B provided in November 2017. It reassured Mr B’s MP that it had now assessed the information and awarded Mr B band B. The Council advised this award was backdated to January 2018.
38. In January 2020 social care arranged a multi-agency meeting to assess Mr B’s needs. Mr B said his floating support worker helped him to check properties on the Council’s housing system every week, but he had not found anything suitable and therefore had not placed any bids. He said he wanted a ground floor property with no one above him, anywhere in Ealing. Attendees at the meeting explained that some of his expectations may not be met from the existing housing stock and advised him to speak to the housing department about his options.
39. Mr B’s social worker arranged a meeting with him, his carer, his floating support worker and the housing department in February 2020. Mr B told the housing department what type of accommodation he wanted and stated that he should not have to pay for it. The Council advised that for Mr B to access long-term accommodation he needed to bid on properties.

Analysis

40. Mr B’s social worker submitted a change of circumstances form and supporting medical information for Mr B to the Council’s housing department in November 2017. The Council did not assess the medical information that was submitted until February 2019. The Council’s reassessment decided he was in band C. Mr B’s social worker advocated for him to have greater priority and he was subsequently awarded band B priority in March 2019. The Council backdated Mr B’s housing priority to January 2018. The Council was at fault for its delay in assessing Mr B’s medical information.
41. If it was not for the Council’s fault, it would have awarded Mr B band B priority in January 2018. The Council backdated his award to this date remedying some of the injustice caused by the delay.
42. If Mr B had bid weekly from March 2019 with band B priority, on the balance of probabilities, he would have secured a property by August 2019. However, Mr B did not place any bids. As Mr B did not place any bids in this period whilst having support to do so, it is not considered that Mr B missed out on securing longer-term accommodation because of the Council’s fault.
43. There is some uncertainty about whether a property Mr B would have considered suitable could have become available during the period of delay, and this caused Mr B an injustice that has yet to be remedied by the Council.
44. Mr B complains the Council left him in unsuitable accommodation. In January 2018, the Council offered to move Mr B to different accommodation. Mr B decided he did not want to move. Since then, the Council has offered to move Mr B again but each time he has told the Council he wants to stay where he is until he secures longer-term housing. Therefore, it was Mr B’s choice to remain in his current accommodation.
45. Once the Council has fulfilled the recommended remedy, it will have done everything required to support Mr B to secure long-term accommodation and to remedy the identified fault.

Agreed action

46. Within one month of the final decision, the Council will:
• Pay Mr B £500 for the delay in assessing his medical information and the uncertainty of whether a property he would have considered suitable could have become available during the period of delay.
47. Within three months of the final decision the Council will:
• Review the case to determine why the delay occurred and identify service improvements to ensure this situation does not reoccur.
48. The Council should provide the Ombudsman with evidence these actions have been completed.

Back to top

Final decision

49. I have completed my investigation and uphold Mr B’s complaint. Mr B was caused an injustice by the actions of the Council. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

50. I have not investigated Mr B’s complaint about the Council not helping him to get a passport or a laptop because the complaints are late; these issues date back to August 2017.
51. I have not investigated matters about the alleged mice infestation in Mr B’s accommodation because he is taking legal action against his landlord.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman