Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s failure to rehouse her for the past two years despite her property being in serious disrepair and her family’s multiple special needs. The Ombudsman finds no fault on the Council’s part.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s failure to rehouse her for the past two years despite her property being in serious disrepair and her family’s multiple special needs. She says she and her family have been living in unsuitable conditions for longer than they should have been causing distress and exacerbating their health conditions.

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. 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

3. I have considered all the information provided by Ms X, made enquiries of the Council and considered its comments and the documents it provided.
4. Ms 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

Legal and administrative background

5. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing.  All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme.  (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
6. An allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants in the following categories:
• homeless people;
• people in insanitary, overcrowded or unsatisfactory housing;
• people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds;
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others;

(Housing Act 1996, section 166A(3))

7. The Ombudsman recognises that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. He may not find fault with a council for failing to rehouse someone if it has prioritised applicants and allocated to properties according to its published allocations scheme.

Key facts

8. Ms X lives in a three-bedroom first-floor house with her three children aged between 17 and 9 years old. Ms X and her children all have significant health problems.
9. In March 2018 the living room ceiling collapsed. The Council completed temporary repairs to make the property safe. It subsequently completed a full structural survey which found the property was structurally sound and all the rooms were usable. The Council was satisfied it was possible to complete the required works while the family remained in the property but agreed that, because of their health problems, repair works would be completed with the property being vacant.
10. In July 2018 the Council offered to move the family into an adapted furnished apartment in either Battersea or Hammersmith while the repairs were carried out. Ms X declined because the properties were out of borough and away from her support network. The Council offered to reimburse Ms X’s reasonable travel expenses but she declined.
11. In September 2018 Ms X applied for a housing transfer on the grounds that she needed more bedrooms. Her application was registered in November 2018 following an assessment of need. Ms X submitted medical information in respect of her health and her daughters’ health.
12. The Council offered to move the family to an identical property immediately opposite their existing house. It said Ms X could accept the property on a temporary basis while the repairs to her house were being completed or could remain there on a permanent basis if she chose to do so at any time in the process. The property had a disabled accessible shower and met the family’s immediate three-bedroom need. The Council also considered dividing the living space to accommodate a fourth bedroom to meet the family’s amended need for a four-bedroom property. Ms X declined the offer because she did not want a temporary move to a three bedroom property as she had now qualified for a four bedroom property and did not want the upheaval of having the property converted to four bedrooms.
13. The Council says it discussed with Ms X that she could secure her own temporary accommodation and it would cover the costs and offer a daily allowance for the family but Ms X declined this offer.
14. In January 2019 the Council’s medical adviser recommended medical priority for an additional bedroom because of the combination of health factors in the household. The adviser assessed Ms X as requiring a mobility category 3 property (level access property with no internal stairs).
15. Accordingly, Ms X was registered on the medical priority transfer list for a four-bedroom property and the Council added 250 points to her application to reflect her urgent need to move to a more suitable home. The Council wrote to Ms X explaining she could now bid for four-bedroom properties in mobility category 3.
16. In March 2020 the Council offered Ms X a temporary or permanent move to another property. Ms X refused the offer because the house was the same size and layout as her current property and so was not suitable as she now qualified for a four-bedroom property.
17. Ms X proposed that the Council house her in a three-bedroom property and her eldest daughter in a separate one-bedroom property close by to avoid the need for a four-bedroom property because the waiting list for such properties was extremely long. The Council agreed to this in principle.
18. The Council offered another three-bedroom house to Ms X in May 2020. She refused the offer because the property was the same size and layout as her current house.

Analysis

19. The Council accepts that, because of the family’s health concerns, they would need to move out of their current house for the repair works to be completed. It has offered several properties which the family could move to on a temporary basis and the option of remaining on a permanent basis if they wished. The Council found it difficult to source three-bedroom properties that met Ms X’s requirements which are quite specific.
20. Ms X wishes to remain in the same area and wants a ground floor property with a self-contained entrance which is not on a housing estate. She also requires an adapted bathroom and a separate toilet. The Council explained to Ms X that, while it was trying to obtain a suitable property, these requirements made it difficult.
21. Ms X later qualified for a four-bedroom property. There are a very limited number of such properties and the Council has explained that, so far, none have become available which meet Ms X’s requirements.
22. I am satisfied the Council has dealt with Ms X’s housing application properly. It has offered to move the family to temporary accommodation while works are carried out to their own property and has also offered permanent accommodation which is the same size as the family’s current house but in a better state of repair. It has even agreed to make an exception to its housing allocations policy by agreeing to offer Ms X a three-bedroom property and her daughter a one-bedroom property to resolve the situation. The Council made Ms X three offers of three-bedroom properties but she has refused these offers. The Council has confirmed it will continue its efforts to obtain a suitable property for the family. I do not consider it can do any more than this.
23. Ms X says the housing team has ignored representations by her local councillor, children’s services and health professionals. But the Council has provided evidence that this is not the case.
24. Ms X submitted medical information in support of her application for housing. The Council’s medical adviser considered this information and awarded medical priority as a result. It is therefore clear that the views of health professionals were considered by the housing team.
25. In March 2020 Ms X’s local councillor contacted the housing team requesting an update. The team provided an update. The local councillor did not request any further action.
26. In July 2020 the housing team received a request from a short breaks practitioner in children’s services for information about the family’s situation. The team provided information. This did not lead to any specific input or recommendations from children’s services regarding support or housing.
27. A senior practitioner in children’s services also contacted the housing team for information. She was completing an assessment of the children following Ms X’s contact with children’s services. The housing team provided information and the senior practitioner responded stating that children’s services would be closing their case as the housing situation did not constitute a health and safety concern for the children.
28. I am satisfied that the housing team responded to requests for information from children’s services and Ms X’s local councillor. There was no requirement for it to take any further action in this regard.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I do not uphold Ms X’s complaint.
30. 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