Summary: Mr X complains that he missed out on bidding for properties for about 11 weeks after the Council withdrew an offer of housing. It was fault for the Council to advertise the property as two-bedrooms when in fact it was a three-bedroom property, but it was entitled to withdraw the offer. Due to a change in computer systems, the Council is unable to provide detailed information about what happened in the period so Mr X is left not knowing if he would have been offered another property. As a result of this further fault, the Council should now offer Mr X the next available two bedroom house.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that as a result of the Council withdrawing an offer of housing, he missed out on bidding for properties for about 11 weeks.
2. Mr X says he is left not knowing whether he would have secured a new property in that period of time.

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’. 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)
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. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• discussed the issues with the complainant;
• sent my draft decision to both the Council and the complainant and taken account of their comments in reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr X is currently on the housing register and placing bids for available properties. Mr X was assessed as being in Band C with an effective date of 14 October 2015. Mr X has been assessed as needing a two bedroom house.
7. Mr X placed a bid on a property and was told his bid had been successful. The property was advertised as a two bedroom property. The Council contacted Mr X in May 2019 to say his bid had been successful. It asked him to provide further details including bank statements and payslips in order to verify his application. On the same day the Council also sent a formal offer letter and invited Mr X to view the property.
8. On 30 May Mr X visited the property in order to view it. He says that while viewing the property the housing officer stopped the viewing and explained an error had been made and the property was a three-bed and so he was not eligible for it.
9. Mr X was upset by this turn of events. He contacted the Council asking it to honour its offer and allow him to move into the property. The Head of Housing replied to Mr X saying it was a genuine mistake that the property had been advertised as a two-bedroom property. It was only when the officer attended the viewing that it was realised the property had three-bedrooms. The Council noted the tenancy agreement had not yet been signed. The Council offered its sincere apologies for the mistake.
10. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman. We referred the complaint back to the Council for consideration through its formal complaint procedure. The Council sent its stage one complaint response to Mr X on 3 December. It noted a mistake had been made in May which resulted in the Council withdrawing its offer of a property. It again apologised for the undue distress caused to Mr X and his family. It said it had improved its procedures to ensure a property is not incorrectly advertised again. It also encouraged Mr X to place bids on available properties.
11. The Council escalated the complaint to stage two of its complaint’s procedure. Mr X claimed the offer made was legally binding and the Council had not fully considered the needs of his family. The Council said it had reviewed the offer letter and its legal officer took the view it was not legally binding. It quoted its allocation policy which says an offer can be withdrawn if an error is made in the advertising criteria.

Analysis

12. The Council accepts there was fault in this case. It offered Mr X a property after he made a bid and sent a formal offer letter. It also requested further details in order to verify the offer. Mr X was invited to view the property before signing the tenancy agreement and it was when he arrived for the viewing that he found out the offer of the property was being withdrawn. Advertising the property and offering it to Mr X as a two bedroom property was fault.
13. As I have identified fault, I have to consider how Mr X has been affected by this. I therefore made written enquiries to the Council to get more information about what happened and in particular whether Mr X may have missed out on bidding on available properties in the period after he was offered the property until it was withdrawn.
14. The Council says it introduced a new computerised system in August 2019 and as a result it cannot access any data prior to that date. This means it has been unable to provide a list of properties advertised during the period Mr X was not placing bids as he thought he had been allocated a property. The limited information I have indicates the property was probably offered to Mr X sometime in April. By June, the Council had withdrawn the offer and Mr X knew he would not be moving to the property.
15. So it would appear Mr X lost the opportunity to place bids for approximately six weeks. I would not expect Mr X to make bids in that period as he was happy with the offer made and so there would be no reason for him to continue to look at advertised properties and place bids.
16. Mr X was able to provide details of three properties he says were advertised in that period and that he would have placed bids on them. I asked the Council to provide details of all new tenancies starting after April 2019 on those three streets. I also asked it to provide details of the successful bidder’s banding and effective date. This would enable me to see if Mr X had missed out on one of these properties. The information provided by the Council shows that two tenancies which started in November 2019 were allocated to tenants with lower priority than Mr X. However, I still do not know if one property was advertised at a time when Mr X was not placing bids.
17. Based on the information I have seen, I cannot say for certain whether Mr X would have been offered a property if he had been placing bids between April and June 2019. What I do know is that he had enough priority to be in third place for the property that was subsequently withdrawn and that since August 2019 Mr X has only placed four bids and none were successful.
18. However, the reason there is uncertainty is because the Council lost the information relating to bidding histories when it moved to a new computerised system. Therefore, this uncertainty is as a direct result of fault by the Council. I do not consider Mr X should be penalised because of fault by the Council. While it is possible he could be gaining an advantage if I recommend he is offered the next available property, I consider, on balance, this is the appropriate outcome because the Council cannot show he has not missed out.

Agreed action

19. To remedy the injustice caused to Mr X the Council should make a direct offer to Mr X of the next available two bedroom house. This offer will be subject to the approval of the Council’s Disabled Adaptations Surveyor As it is not possible to say when such a property will become available and the Council says it does not have the capacity to regularly update Mr X about his case, it is open to him to contact the housing allocations section for regular updates.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault for the reasons explained in this statement. The Council has agreed to implement the actions I have recommended. These appropriately remedy any injustice caused by fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman