Southend-on-Sea Borough Council (20 000 366)

Statement Upheld Allocations 18-Feb-2021

Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council's handling of her application to join the housing register. She says the Council ignored medical evidence and disrepair issues of damp and mould. She also says the Council delayed in accepting her onto the register. We find fault with the Council for not properly considering Mrs X's medical evidence. This caused a delay in her being accepted onto the register. We also find fault with the Council's complaint handling. We have made recommendations.

Westminster City Council (20 002 470)

Statement Upheld Allocations 16-Feb-2021

Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council considered his housing application and its decision that he did not qualify to join the Housing Register. He complained that the Council failed to inform him of his right to request a review and it did not make a review decision when he later requested one. We found the Council was at fault and this caused injustice to Mr X. The Council has agreed to provide a suitable remedy.

London Borough of Hillingdon (20 003 557)

Statement Upheld Allocations 11-Feb-2021

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council wrongly decided he has no housing need and so he did not qualify to join its Housing Register. We found fault because the Council did not follow the procedure in its housing allocations policy for medical assessments when it assessed Mr X's housing needs. This caused injustice to Mr X because his application was not properly considered. The Council has agreed to reconsider his application and make a new decision.

London Borough of Ealing (19 018 437)

Statement Upheld Allocations 11-Feb-2021

Summary: The Council failed to properly check Ms B's application before it allowed her to join the Council's housing register. It decided almost two years later that Ms B was not eligible to join the register and then failed to properly review its decision. The Council also failed to properly respond to Ms B's formal complaint, or to her numerous telephone calls and emails and her initial requests for a review. The Council has agreed to make a payment to Ms B, review its decision and take action to prevent similar failings in future.

Eastleigh Borough Council (19 017 155)

Statement Upheld Allocations 10-Feb-2021

Summary: Miss X complains the Council failed to consider properly her banding review request and awarded her the incorrect priority banding. Miss X says this meant she was living in unsuitable accommodation with her family, which has caused her distress and affected her mental health. The Ombudsman finds fault in the way the Council explained its decision to Miss X, and for failing to properly assess her banding priority on health and welfare grounds. To remedy the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise and make Miss X a payment for the distress and uncertainty caused.

Wycombe District Council (19 006 212)

Statement Not upheld Allocations 09-Feb-2021

Summary: There is no fault with the Council's assessment of Ms B's housing priority. Ms B has enough priority to enable her to be first on the short list for most suitable properties. However, the Council cannot give her priority for the housing areas she would prefer to live in as they are in another Council's area. The Council has made Ms B aware of the options available to her, including offering three properties it considers suitable.

Birmingham City Council (20 006 405)

Statement Upheld Allocations 09-Feb-2021

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained the Council wrongly determined they do not qualify for the housing register and refused to consider their review request. The Council's failure to properly assess Mr and Mrs X's application to join the housing register amounts to fault. The Council has taken action to redress any injustice this caused.

Worthing Borough Council (20 006 170)

Statement Upheld Allocations 08-Feb-2021

Summary: The Council was at fault for how it dealt with Miss B's housing application. Its register allows people to move into its area if they have a need to move, such as unsuitable accommodation or the need to receive family support. These were the reasons Miss B gave in her application, but the Council did not properly consider her circumstances. It has agreed to make a new decision.

Westminster City Council (20 002 700)

Statement Not upheld Allocations 03-Feb-2021

Summary: Ms Q has complained about the suitability of her temporary Council accommodation and has requested an accommodation transfer and a refund of her service charges. She says the matters are impacting adversely on her wellbeing. However, the Ombudsman will not investigate this matter as Ms Q has a legal right of an internal review by the Council. As regards to Ms Q's transfer request, the Council has applied its allocations policy and the Ombudsman has not identified fault in this respect.

Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (19 013 079)

Statement Upheld Allocations 03-Feb-2021

Summary: Mrs X and Miss Y complained about the Council's failure to address their housing situation. We find the Council was at fault by not properly considering their request to be given higher priority for social housing. This caused frustration and distress. To remedy this injustice, the Council has agreed apologise and make a payment to Mrs X and Miss Y. We have not found fault with the other matters complained about.