Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to deal with her housing priority and bids for properties correctly. We did not find fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that her family need an urgent housing move due to medical issues and harassment by a neighbour. She complained that her priority for housing should be higher. She also complained that she had not won several properties she placed bids for. She questioned why because, after bidding closed she was placed first.

Back to top

What I have investigated

2. I have investigated the issues Miss X raised about her housing priority and the way her bids were dealt with. I have not considered the actions the Council took, as a landlord, in respect of the anti-social behaviour issues. The reasons for this are set out in the last section of this statement.

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. 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)
5. 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

6. I spoke to Miss X and considered her complaint and the information she provided. I asked the Council for information and I considered its response to the complaint.
7. 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 allocations policy

8. The Council’s policy sets out the housing priority bands it uses to prioritise applications for housing. It has four bands, Bronze, Silver, Gold and Emergency. If applicants have more than one housing need, which cross different bands, the Council will grant the highest band they are eligible for.
9. To qualify for the Emergency Band, someone must meet one of the following criteria:
• a ‘severe impact’ under a medical or welfare need.
• their current home is dangerous and unsuitable for occupation or it is unsuitable for them to be discharged to from hospital, resulting in ‘bed-blocking’.
• The police or other agency state that the property is unsafe due to threats or acts of violence.
• The applicant or a member of the household has suffered a sudden ‘traumatic event’ linked to the home which means living there will cause considerable distress.
10. Eligibility for the Gold band includes:
• People who are homeless, people who lack 2 bedrooms in their current home or people whose current home meets the definition for statutory overcrowding.
• People who are victims of harassment or violence.
• Where medical or welfare grounds cause significant impact.
• Where there is serious disrepair to their current property that cannot be resolved or where they need to leave to allow major works to take place.
• Where a combination of other criteria may be applicable.

What happened

Housing Priority

11. Miss X and her partner originally applied for social housing in August 2018.
12. Miss X explained that her husband has a number of health difficulties and suffers from ADHD and PTSD. She also explained their daughter has autism and needs to be in a separate bedroom to her sibling.
13. The Council agreed that Miss X’s family had high welfare needs. As a result, their application was granted Gold Band status. The Council noted Miss X’s family did not meet any of the criteria for the emergency band.
14. In addition to the health and welfare information provided, Miss X also told the Council they had suffered some anti-social behaviour from a neighbour. The Council told us it was aware of this and it acknowledged it may have been unpleasant for them. However, it stated the level of this would not have provided any further support for a higher banding as it did not warrant Gold Band Status.
15. The Council says it reviewed Miss X’s band in October 2018 but found no grounds to change Miss X’s priority.
16. I have seen no evidence of fault in the way the Council decided Miss X’s priority for housing. Its decisions were made in accordance with its policy.

Bids for properties

17. Miss X says that she placed several bids for properties, three of which she was placed 1st for after bidding ceased. She questioned why these were not offered to her. In response to Miss X’s complaint the Council provided a list of the properties Miss X placed bids on. These included the three, where she was placed first. The Council explained the reasons why these properties were not offered to Miss X. In one case, the property was prioritised for applicants in need of a wet room. The Council says this was included in the advert.
18. In another case the property was advertised as being prioritised for someone with a local connection to the village it was in. It was allocated to a different family as a result of this. The final property was advertised as being prioritised for Sedgemoor District Council applicants or those directly affected by COVID-19.
19. While I understand it was disappointing for Miss X, the Council’s allocations policy states that there will be instances where properties are ‘labelled’ as having certain eligibility criteria. This means only certain applicants will be considered, or those with certain needs will be given priority for those given properties. The Council’s decisions in the cases above cases took this policy into account and were made properly.
20. Miss X explained, since the issues she complained of she had applied to swap her house with a neighbour. The Council confirmed it would prioritise their mutual exchange request to move to another property, as soon as lockdown restrictions are lifted. 

Back to top

Final decision

21. We found no fault in the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

22. We are unable to consider the way the Council dealt with the anti-social behaviour issues Miss X complained of. This is because the Council was acting in its capacity as a landlord when dealing with these. Complaints about registered social housing providers must be made to the Housing Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman