Summary: Mr B complains that the Council failed to backdate his recent housing application to the date of his original application which was cancelled in 2016 when he did not renew it. The Ombudsman finds no fault on the Council’s part. In any event, it has now backdated Mr B’s application.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains that the Council was at fault in failing to backdate his recent housing application to the date of his previous application which was cancelled in 2016 when he did not receive correspondence from the Council.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)
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

5. I have considered all the information provided by Mr B, made enquiries of the Council and considered its comments and the documents it provided.
6. I have written to Mr B and the Council with my draft decision and given them an opportunity to comment.

Back to top

What I found

Key facts

7. Mr B lives with his elderly mother who is a council tenant. In 2003 he applied to join the Council’s housing register in the hope that he would one day obtain his own tenancy after his mother’s death. His application was placed on the register.
8. In accordance with its procedures, the Council sent an email to Mr B every year asking him to renew his application. Each year Mr B did so.
9. In April 2016 the Council sent an email to Mr B asking him to renew his application. He did not respond so the Council sent another email in May 2016 explaining that, if he did not do so within 21 days, his application would be cancelled and he would need to re-apply to join the register and would lose his original date of application. Mr B did not respond so the Council cancelled his application.
10. In March 2019 Mr B contacted the Council stating he had received no communication for a long time and no longer had a computer to check on progress and had to rely on his sister. He confirmed he wished to remain on the waiting list and asked the Council to send details to his sister’s email address if he needed to update his application.
11. The Council responded explaining Mr B no longer had a live housing application as it had been removed in June 2016 because he did not renew it despite requests being made. He was invited to make a new application.
12. Mr B’s sister, Ms T, submitted a new application on his behalf. The Council wrote to her confirming the application had been placed on the housing register with a priority date of March 2019. Ms T asked the Council to reinstate Mr B’s original application date because he had not received the Council’s emails.
13. The housing options manager considered Ms T’s request as an appeal. He decided he could not agree to her request because reminders had been sent to Mr B in 2016 and, as no response was received, the application was removed.
14. Ms B complained to the Ombudsman. Following the Ombudsman’s enquiries, the Council reviewed its practice of removing applicants who do not renew their application. It decided that, in future, applicants will no longer be required to renew their applications.
15. In light of this revised approach, the Council has agreed to backdate Mr B’s application to his original date of application.

Analysis

16. The Council’s housing allocations scheme does not refer to the cancellation of applications if applicants fail to re-register. But its practice at the time of Mr B’s appeal was that applicants were required to renew their application on a yearly basis and were sent reminders. If they did not respond, their application was cancelled.
17. The Council considered Mr B’s appeal but decided there were no special circumstances requiring it to act outside its normal practice of removing applicants who did not respond to renewal requests. It considered it was Mr B’s responsibility to either check his emails or inform the Council if he was no longer using the email address he had provided. The Council was satisfied it had taken reasonable steps to remind Mr B of the need to renew his application.
18. The Council says its position at the time of the appeal was that Mr B had provided his email address as part of his initial application and it would expect messages sent to this address to be received. It would also expect that, if an applicant had an interest in obtaining accommodation, they would regularly log onto the Home Options website to view properties and place bids. They would see reminders on the website advising them to renew their application in order to remain registered.
19. However, Mr B’s situation was unusual in that he did not need to view properties and place bids while he was able to continue living with his mother. So he did not need to visit the Council’s website. But he wishes to remain on the register so that he can obtain a property in future following his mother’s death.
20. Following the Ombudsman’s enquiries, the Council has re-considered its approach decided that applicants will no longer be asked to renew their application in order to remain on the register. It will take some time for the Council’s computer systems to be adjusted to put this in place, but any applicants who fail to renew their applications in the meantime will not be removed from the register.
21. I am satisfied the Council properly considered Mr B’s appeal. In the absence of administrative fault, there are no grounds to question its decision. In any event, the Council has now agreed to backdate Mr B’s application so he has the outcome he was seeking.

Back to top

Final decision

22. I find no fault on the Council’s part.
23. I have completed my investigation on the basis I am satisfied with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman