Summary: Miss X complains about the Council’s decision to offer her a property in July 2019 which she considered was unsuitable for her needs. It was not fault to make that offer, and the Council later withdrew it, but there was some fault in the way it dealt with her complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X for its handling of her complaint.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that:
• a male officer telephoned her in July 2019 to offer her a flat when the Council had previously agreed only female officers would contact her;
• the flat offered in July 2019 was unsuitable for her medical needs because it had a wet room when she has an assessed need for a bath. She believes this led to her missing out on other offers of suitable properties at the time;
• the Council did not respond fully to her complaint at the first stage of its complaints procedure and then refused to escalate it to the next stage.

Back to top

What I have investigated

2. I have investigated the complaints set out in the second and third bullet points in paragraph 1. I decided not to investigate the complaint in the first bullet point for the reasons given in paragraphs 34 to 36.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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’. We provide a free service, but we must use public money carefully. We have discretion not to investigate if we believe:

• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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 Miss X’s complaint and all the correspondence she sent me.
6. I considered the Council’s response to my enquiries and relevant records from its housing file.
7. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The background to this complaint

8. At the time of the events of this complaint, Miss X was a Housing Association tenant. She lived in a third floor flat in a building with no lift access. She has multiple disabilities which affect her physical and mental health and limit her mobility.
9. In January 2017 an Occupational Therapist from Adult Social Care sent an email to the Housing Options service supporting Miss X’s request to move to sheltered accommodation. She said Miss X was prone to falls and her mobility was affected by medical conditions. Miss X wanted to buy a mobility scooter but there was no space in her current accommodation to store one. It was not a full housing needs report. There was no bathing needs assessment and the Occupational Therapist did not say whether Miss X would need a bath or a shower.
10. In May 2018 Miss X sent the Council a letter from her GP. The GP said Miss X’s circumstances were exceptional and she had high priority needs. In the GP’s opinion, she needed to move to prevent a severe risk to her life and wellbeing. The letter did not mention any specific bathing needs.
11. Following an interview with Miss X, the Council assessed Miss X’s housing needs and decided the Housing Association flat was not suitable. It accepted her application to join its Housing Register and awarded medium priority in May 2017. The medium priority band includes applicants who:
• have been assessed by an Occupational Therapist as needing to move to an accessible property; or
• have a medical condition or care need which is directly linked to unsuitable accommodation.
12. The housing assessment recorded Miss X’s essential housing needs as:
• a one bedroom self-contained flat;
• a property close to shops and essential facilities;
• space to store and charge a mobility scooter;
• a balcony if the accommodation was above the ground floor;
• up to the fourth floor with a lift;
• a warden-controlled property with a secure entry system and internal alarm to request assistance in an emergency.

The offer of accommodation in July 2019

13. In July 2019 a male officer called Miss X to invite her to view a property. The property was a third floor flat with a wet room and no bath.
14. Miss X refused the offer. The Council recorded her reasons as the lack of a bath and the flat being on a high floor level. The Council accepted the property did not match Miss X’s stated preference for a bath and withdrew the offer. It says it immediately reinstated Miss X for another offer.
15. The Council says Miss X did not miss out on any other potential offers of suitable property as a result. The only other warden-controlled property available on that day was a flat on the 9th floor. The Council allocated this property to an applicant in the High priority band who had greater priority than Miss X.

The handling of Miss X’s complaint

16. There are three stages in the Council’s corporate complaints procedure.
17. The corporate complaints policy says complaints are only escalated to the next stage in the process if the person making the complaint:
• explains clearly and specifically why they are not satisfied with the outcome of the previous stage; and
• explains what more they think the Council should do.

The policy makes it clear that the Council will not escalate a complaint through every stage simply because the complainant disagrees with an earlier response. The Council must agree the complaint should progress to Stage Two or Stage Three.

18. Miss X sent a letter of complaint to the Council on 30 July 2019. She raised the following issues:
• a male officer had called her when it had previously been agreed that a female officer would handle her case;
• the accommodation offered was not suitable because she needed a property with a bath and this was one of the Occupational Therapist’s recommendations;
• her concern that she may have missed out on a different offer of suitable accommodation because she had been wrongly offered this property;
• details of the offer were not put in writing;
• the Council had directly discriminated against her in breach of the Equality Act 2010 (this seems to be a reference to the telephone call from a male officer but this is not entirely clear from the letter);
• general dissatisfaction with the conduct of officers.
19. In mid-August 2019 a housing officer replied to Miss X’s complaint at the first stage of the Council’s complaints procedure. She apologised for the distress caused by getting a call from a male officer. She said the records had been updated to note her preference for a bath. The officer did not address the other points in the letter of complaint. She sent Miss X a leaflet explaining how to make a Stage Two complaint if she was not satisfied with this response.
20. On 20 August Miss X asked for her complaint to be considered at the second stage of the Council’s complaints procedure. Among other points, she said the Stage One reply had not responded to her complaint about direct discrimination or the potential missed offer of alternative accommodation. She said she wanted the Council to dismiss, fine or sanction the officers involved and offer her a suitable property immediately which met all her requirements.
21. On 23 August an officer in the Complaints team wrote to Miss X to say she had reviewed the Stage One reply and she was satisfied it addressed all the points in her complaint. She therefore did not accept it for a Stage Two investigation.
22. Miss X took this further because she disagreed with the decision not to carry out a Stage Two investigation. In September 2019 an Assistant Director wrote to Miss X to say she had reviewed the correspondence and agreed with the decision not to carry out a Stage Two investigation. She sent Miss X a copy of the Council’s corporate complaints policy. Miss X then complained to the Ombudsman.

Subsequent events

23. In late November 2019 Miss X was offered a warden controlled flat with a bath and a shower. She moved to the property in January 2020.

Analysis

24. I have considered the Occupational Therapist’s email from January 2017, the GP’s letter from May 2018 and the Council’s record of the May 2019 housing assessment. None of these say Miss X needed a bath due to a medical condition or disability.
25. The Occupational Therapist’s email was not a full housing needs report. It did not make any recommendations about Miss X’s bathing needs. It simply supported her need to move to sheltered accommodation with sufficient space to store a mobility scooter. On the evidence available, it seems Miss X had a strong preference for a bath but this was not a recommendation the Occupational Therapist had made and it was not identified as a need in the May 2019 housing needs assessment.
26. For these reasons, I do not consider the offer made in July 2019 was unsuitable because the flat had a wet room rather than a bath. I do not consider it was fault for the Council to make that offer.
27. In any event the Council promptly agreed to withdraw the offer when Miss X said she wanted a property with a bath. So she did not have to move to a property she considered was unsuitable for her needs. She did not miss out on any other suitable property on the day that offer was made. A few months later the Council offered her a property with a bath and shower. So I do not think Miss X suffered any injustice because she refused the first offer.
28. The Council’s Stage One reply responded to the two main issues in Miss X’s complaint: the suitability of the July 2019 offer and the telephone call by a male officer. I accept Miss X made some additional points in her letter of complaint which were not addressed in the Stage One response.
29. The Council has discretion not to escalate a complaint to the next stage of its complaints procedure if the person does not clearly explain why they are dissatisfied with the previous response or what they expect the Council to do. Miss X said she considered the Stage One reply had not addressed some parts of her complaint. She said what outcome she wanted to achieve. Although disciplinary action against officers is not an outcome the Council would deliver as a remedy for a complaint, Miss X also said she wanted another offer of accommodation.
30. I understand that officers have discretion and must make a judgment about whether the criteria for a Stage Two investigation are met. However I find that Miss X’s request met the criteria in the corporate complaints policy for a Stage Two investigation. It was therefore fault not to accept it for investigation. Miss X was frustrated by this decision and it prompted her to make a complaint to the Ombudsman.
31. As I found no fault in the decision to make the offer in July 2019, and Miss X has since been rehoused, I do not consider any worthwhile outcome could be achieved now by a further investigation of the other matters raised in July 2019.

Agreed action

32. Within one month of this decision, the Council will apologise to Miss X for the fault we found in the way it considered her request for a Stage Two investigation of her complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

33. I have completed the investigation and found the Council was not at fault when it made the offer of accommodation in July 2019. I found fault in the way the Council handled Miss X’s complaint. This caused Miss X some frustration.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

34. I did not investigate Miss X’s complaint that a male officer called her to make the offer of accommodation in July 2019.
35. Due to Miss X’s personal circumstances, the Council had previously agreed that only female officers would deal with her housing application. It accepts that a male officer should not have called her in July 2019. It apologised to Miss X for the distress this caused when it replied to her complaint at the first stage of its complaints procedure. It has also updated its records for future contact with Miss X.
36. Miss X wants the Ombudsman to investigate this further to find out how and why this error happened. She regards it as a deliberate act of harassment. But I do not consider it is necessary or proportionate to pursue this in view of the action the Council has already taken. Further investigation would not achieve a different outcome for Miss X or add to the Council’s investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman