London Borough of Hillingdon (19 005 417)

Category : Housing > Allocations

Decision : Not upheld

Decision date : 10 Dec 2019

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s housing allocation decision. He says he asked the Council not to place a tenant with a child in the flat above him, but the Council did so anyway. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains about the Council’s housing allocation decision. He says the Council has placed four consecutive antisocial tenants in the flat above him. He says he asked the Council to ensure it did not place a tenant with a child in the flat, but it did so anyway. Mr X also complains about flooding to his property caused by the tenant upstairs and of antisocial behaviour.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)
  2. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
  3. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
  4. 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

  1. I spoke with Mr X and considered the information he provided.
  2. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
  3. I have sent a draft decision to Mr X and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Council’s housing allocation policy

  1. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
  2. Section 5.10 of the Council’s policy notes that it is in the interest of residents and tenants, on occasions, that an individual property is let sensitively in light of the experience of neighbouring tenants. It says that where a request for a sensitive let is sought, the Council will consider it. It highlights that sensitive lets will only be agreed where it can be demonstrated that:
  • The neighbouring tenants have experienced either harassment, noise nuisance, un-tenant like behaviour over a period of time, or of an excessive nature, and incidents have been recorded and action has been taken by the landlord.
  • There is a public protection issue that must be managed.

What happened

  1. Mr X is a council tenant. Mr X said there has been a history of antisocial behaviour from three previous tenants of the flat above his.
  2. Mr X said the last tenant had a child who was noisy. When that tenant left, Mr X asked the Council not to let the flat out to another tenant with a child, given the previous issues.
  3. The Council let the flat above Mr X to a new tenant in January 2018. The Council said the tenant did not have any antisocial behaviour reports against her at her previous address.
  4. The Council also said its records showed the tenant did not have any children and that she lives on her own.

Analysis

  1. The Council’s policy notes the Council will consider a request for a sensitive let. In this case, Mr X has asked the Council to consider a sensitive let due to the issues which had occurred previously.
  2. The Council has demonstrated it considered the request. The evidence shows the Council looked at whether the tenant had any previous antisocial behaviour reports before it let the property to her. Further, the evidence shows the tenant does not have any children.
  3. Therefore, as the Council has properly considered Mr X’s request for a sensitive letting, I cannot find fault with the decision itself.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. Subject to further comments by Mr X and the Council, I intend to find no fault with the Council’s housing allocation decision.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

  1. I have not investigated Mr X’s complaints about flooding and antisocial behaviour as these are about the Council’s actions as a registered social housing provider.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings