Summary: there was no fault in the way the Council assessed Miss X’s housing priority band and considered her review request.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that the Council did not award appropriate priority to her housing application. Following a review, it awarded Band C but Miss X considers she should be in Band B because she has multiple needs.
2. Miss X needs to move to a property with a bathroom on the same level as the bedroom because this is more suitable for her medical needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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 spoken to Miss X and considered all the information she sent me. I considered the Council’s comments and its records of Miss X’s housing assessment and her review and appeal.
6. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Council’s housing allocation policy

7. Ipswich Borough Council is one of seven councils in Suffolk and Essex which have a common Housing Register and choice-based lettings scheme to allocate social housing. Applicants accepted on the register can bid for properties advertised on the Gateway to Homechoice scheme.
8. All seven councils have a common housing allocations policy which sets out the rules for assessing an applicant’s housing needs and deciding their priority band.

Priority bands

9. There are five priority bands - Band A is the highest and Band E is the lowest. The housing allocations policy explains the criteria for each priority band.
10. For the purpose of this investigation, I only need to summarise the criteria for awarding Band C, Band E and Band B (multiple needs).
11. To qualify for Band C the applicant must satisfy one of the following criteria:
• A moderate medical or welfare award;
• Be threatened with homelessness within 56 days and owed the homelessness prevention duty;
• Be homeless and owed the homelessness relief duty;
• Be homeless but not in priority need;
• Have been served with a valid notice to quit by a landlord which did not arise from a breach of the tenancy;
• Be homeless and in priority need but intentionally homeless;
• Be living in overcrowded social or private rented housing outside the area of the Gateway to Homechoice councils but with a local connection to that area;
• Be homeless with no fixed abode or sharing or lacking essential facilities in their accommodation;
• Be living in supported accommodation with a fixed term licence;
• Be living in a property where a hazard awareness notice has been served by the Private Sector Housing Team for a Category 1 or 2 hazard (and satisfy some further conditions);
• Be living in a property subject to a suspended improvement notice or prohibition order which is likely to become active;
• Be someone who meets the Band B criteria but has no local connection to the any council in the Gateway Homechoice area.

Applicants with multiple housing needs – defined as meeting four or more of the Band C criteria - move up to Band B.

12. Band E applies where the council considers the applicant’s current accommodation adequately meets their housing needs in terms of property type, size and facilities.

Medical assessments

13. Applicants who believe their medical condition or disability is affected by their current accommodation may ask for a medical assessment by completing a self-assessment form. The council may seek medical information from the applicant’s GP, hospital consultant, health visitors or other medical professionals.
14. If a council accepts the applicant’s need to be rehoused on medical grounds, it awards Band A, B or C priority depending on the degree of need. The officer assesses the evidence and completes a form to decide whether the impact of the current accommodation on the medical condition or disability is critical, serious, moderate, or low. The housing allocations policy includes a table which shows how the different medical priority bands are applied.

Welfare awards

15. The housing allocations policy also makes provision for priority on welfare grounds if the applicant is vulnerable. The welfare award may be Band A, B or C depending on the severity of the need. However applicants cannot get medical and welfare priority. So if an applicant applies for both, the council will award the highest band for which they qualify.

The two stage review and appeal procedure

16. The law requires councils to have a single stage review procedure to consider an applicant’s challenge to a decision on a housing application (including a dispute about the correct priority band). However Ipswich, along with the other councils in the scheme, have adopted a two stage procedure.
17. At the first stage, the applicant may ask for a review within 21 days of receiving the decision. It is then reviewed by a different officer in the same Council who sends a written response within eight weeks. If the applicant is not satisfied with the review decision, they can ask for it to be considered by another council in the scheme. This is referred to as the appeal stage.
18. All appeals against Ipswich Borough Council’s decisions are considered by Council X. The appeal decision is made within eight weeks.

Miss X’s housing needs

19. Miss X is a tenant in the private rented sector. She lives in a two bedroom house with her young child and is expecting another child. The bathroom and toilet are on the ground floor.
20. Miss X has severe anxiety and a depressive disorder. She suffers from panic attacks and paranoia. She takes prescribed medication which she says cause incontinence and dizzy spells. Due to her mental health conditions, she is too frightened to go downstairs to use the toilet in the night. So she has used a potty in her bedroom instead. She believes it would improve her mental health if she could move to a property where the bathroom is on the same floor as the bedroom.
21. Miss X applied to join the Housing Register in late May 2019. She completed a medical self-assessment form. She described the impact her accommodation had on her mental health. She sent a letter from her GP confirming her conditions. The GP said Miss X struggled to leave the house and was getting regular telephone support from a specialist mental health nurse. The GP had increased her anti-depressant medication to help manage her symptoms.
22. In late May 2019 an assessment officer decided Miss X had a serious medical condition but considered her current accommodation had a low impact on her health. For this reason she did not award medical priority. She awarded Band E because she considered Miss X was adequately housed and did not need to move for medical or welfare reasons.
23. In mid-July 2019 Miss X asked for a review of this decision. She said her mental health had deteriorated and she could no longer sleep. She had given up attending her course. She said she was too fearful to go downstairs at night to use the toilet. She also mentioned that she was disturbed by noise and anti-social behaviour from neighbours. She submitted a recent letter from her GP which confirmed the diagnosis of severe anxiety, depression, and social phobia.
24. In August 2019 an Ipswich officer, who was senior to the assessment officer, carried out the review. He completed separate forms for a welfare and medical assessment. He noted the evidence in the recent GP’s letter that Miss X’s medication had been increased.
25. He decided Miss X did not meet the criteria for a welfare award but accepted her current accommodation had a moderate adverse impact on her health. He therefore awarded Band C priority on medical grounds.
26. In late August 2019 Miss X asked the Council to reconsider the review decision. She believed she should be awarded Band B because:
• She had a medical need for a bathroom upstairs;
• She was adversely affected by noise and anti-social behaviour from her neighbours;
• She considered her circumstances merited a serious welfare award.
27. Miss X asked the Council to treat this as an appeal and pass it on to Council X (a council in the Gateway to Homechoice scheme).
28. In early September 2019 Council X confirmed it had received the appeal.
29. In mid-October 2019 a team leader from Council X sent the appeal decision. I have read the decision letter. It says he considered the following evidence:
• a letter from the Department for Work & Pensions confirming Miss X’s Personal Independence Payment award;
• the GP’s letter from July 2019;
• Miss X’s emails and letter;
• the August 2019 review decision letter from the senior officer at Ipswich Council.
30. After reviewing all this evidence, he found Ipswich Council had assessed the application correctly in line with the housing allocations policy. He agreed with the reviewing officer’s decision to award Band C priority.

Analysis

31. The crux of this complaint is whether there was fault in the way the Council assessed Miss X’s priority band. She believes she meets the criteria for Band B priority, rather than Band C, because she has multiple housing needs.
32. The original decision to place the application in Band E was overturned on review in July 2019. The reviewing officer considered the information on Miss X’s housing application form, the medical self-assessment form and the July 2019 GP’s letter. Having considered that evidence, he decided Miss X had a moderate medical need and awarded Band C.
33. Miss X then challenged the review decision. She argued she should qualify for Band B because she had multiple housing needs. However, to be awarded Band B for multiple needs, the applicant has to meet four or more of the Band C criteria as defined in the housing allocations policy.
34. I carefully considered the information Miss X gave on the housing application form, and the evidence she sent in for the review and appeal. She met only one of the criteria for Band C (the moderate medical award). Although Miss X reports she is disturbed by noise and anti-social behaviour from neighbours, that is not one of the criteria for a Band C award (paragraph 11). The medical need for proximity to a bathroom had already been accepted at the review stage and led to the award of Band C medical priority. The reviewing officer also considered Miss X’s need for priority on welfare grounds but considered her needs were low. In any event, the housing allocations policy does not allow priority to be awarded on both welfare and medical grounds.
35. For these reasons, I do not consider the Council awarded the wrong priority band at the review stage. It had to follow the rules in its housing allocations policy. As Miss X did not have four or more of the defined Band C needs, she could not qualify for Band B on the basis of multiple needs.
36. I found no fault in the way the Council considered the medical evidence, Miss X’s statement and the self-assessment form. The records show the reviewing officer considered all the relevant evidence before making his decision.
37. The Ombudsman cannot question the merits of a decision provided it has been properly made. In this case I see no fault in the decision-making process.

Back to top

Final decision

38. I have completed the investigation and found no fault in the way the Council assessed Miss X’s housing application and considered her review.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman