Summary: Miss X complains the Council failed to properly consider her application to join the housing register and wrongly determined she had no housing need and did not qualify. The Council’s delay and failure to fully consider Miss X’s circumstances when assessing her application amounts to fault. This fault has caused an injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X complains the Council failed to properly consider her application to join the housing register and wrongly determined she had no housing need and did not qualify.

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. 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)
3. 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

4. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Miss X;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• discussed the issues with Miss X
• 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

Housing allocations

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 some categories, including people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds and people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others.
   (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(3))
7. Councils must notify applicants in writing if they decide for example that an applicant is not eligible for an allocation or is not a qualifying person. The Council must also notify the applicant of the right to request a review of these decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))
8. According to statutory guidance, review procedures should be clear and fair with timescales for each stage of the process, and reviews should be carried out by an officer senior to the original decision maker, or by a panel not including the original decision maker.

What happened here

9. In June 2019 Miss X applied to join the housing register. Miss X advised the Council she could no longer climb the stairs and had a medical need for ground floor accommodation. Miss X provided documentation confirming her medical conditions and a letter from her GP which also advised Miss X needed accommodation separate to her father due to his aggressive behaviour.
10. Miss X contacted the Council in December 2019 as she was unable to log into her account to add further medical evidence. She states the Council advised her it had not yet assessed her application and it could be a further six months before anyone looked at it.
11. In early January 2020 Miss X made a formal complaint. She was unhappy with the delay in dealing with her application and the way council officers had spoken to her. Miss X advised the Council she had applied to join the housing register as her father had threatened to evict her and had attacked her on more than one occasion. She stated her father had told her again that weekend that she had to leave. Miss X also reminded the Council of her medical conditions and asked the Council to help her.
12. There is no record the Council responded to Miss X’s complaint. The Council contacted Miss X in February 2020 to request further information regarding her household so that it could consider overcrowding. An officer then contacted Miss X in late May 2020 to ask for evidence of why her parents needed to be rehoused with her. Miss X clarified that her parents would not be moving and asked how much longer the assessment would take.
13. The Council completed its enquiries and in June 2020 wrote to Miss X to advise she did not qualify to join the housing register. The Council noted the medical evidence Miss X had provided did not demonstrate her current accommodation had a detrimental impact on her health. Nor did it demonstrate an exceptional need to move. In addition, an Occupational Therapy assessment determined her current property met her mobility needs. It concluded Miss X did not have any recognised housing needs to qualify for social housing.
14. Miss X disagreed and requested a review. She advised the Council she would be homeless as of 26 June 2020. The Council reviewed and upheld its decision. It stated Miss X did not have any recognised housing need under the housing allocation scheme and was deemed adequately housed. The Council suggested Miss X contact its housing advice centre regarding her imminent homelessness.
15. As there was no further right of review, Miss X has asked the Ombudsman to investigate her complaint. She considers the Council is putting her at risk of domestic violence by refusing her request for rehousing.
16. In addition to complaining to the Ombudsman Miss X has also reapplied to join the housing register. She states the Council advised her in September 2020 that it was considering applications submitted in February 2020 and there would be a considerable delay in assessing her application.
17. In response to my enquiries the Council states Miss X’s reports of domestic violence at her current accommodation were re-referred for a fresh review. It will let Miss X know if there is any update to her housing application.
18. The Council states Miss X did not meet the requirements for Band 1 preference due to exceptional needs as this is based on verification by senior officers within the police or other agencies. Miss X did not meet Band 2 preference, due to threats of abuse, violence or harassment, as a risk assessment was not available.

Analysis

19. Based on the information currently available I consider there were failings in the way the Council dealt with Miss X’s application to join the housing register.
20. While there is no set timeframe for determining applications to join the housing register we would expect the Council to assess applications in a timely manner. In Miss X’s case the Council took just over a year to determine her application. She completed an online application on 8 June 2019, but the Council did not issue a decision until 22 June 2020. A delay of this length is unacceptable and amounts to fault.
21. In assessing and reviewing Miss X’s application the Council considered Miss X’s medical conditions and mobility, but there is no evidence it considered Miss X’s, potential homelessness or the reports of domestic abuse at her current accommodation. I consider the failure to fully consider Miss X’s circumstances when assessing her application amounts to fault.
22. The Council states it has re-referred Miss X’s application or a fresh review but has not given any timeframe for when this will be completed. I would expect the Council to complete this review without further delay and to keep Miss X informed of the outcome.
23. Given that Miss X has repeatedly told the Council she is at risk of eviction, I would have expected the Council to have identified these contacts as homelessness applications. The Homelessness Code of Guidance says applications can be made to any department of the Council and do not need to be in any particular form. In Gibbons .v. Bury MBC [2010] EWCA a reference to impending homelessness in a housing register application was found to have triggered the duty to make Part 7 enquiries.
24. I consider the Council’s failure to identify and consider whether its homelessness duties were engaged or to provide advice and assistance amounts to fault.
25. Having identified fault, I must consider whether this has caused Miss X a significant injustice. Until the Council has completed its review and fully considered Miss X’s circumstances it is unclear whether Miss X would qualify to join the housing register. It is not therefore possible at this stage to confirm the full extent of any injustice to Miss X.
26. It is clear however that the delay in assessing her application and the failure to fully consider her personal circumstances has caused Miss X uncertainty and frustration and has put her to unnecessary time and trouble.

Agreed action

27. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and pay her £150 in recognition of the uncertainty and time and trouble Miss X was put to by the Council’s delay and failure to properly assess her application.
28. The Council should carry out this action within one month of the final decision on this complaint.
29. The Council has also agreed to complete its review of Miss X’s application to join the housing register, taking account of all of Miss X’s personal circumstances, within one month of the final decision on this complaint.
30. If the review determines Miss X qualifies to join the housing register, the Council should consider whether the unnecessary delay in Miss X joining the housing register has caused her any additional injustice, and if so, take action to redress this.

Back to top

Final decision

31. The Council's delay and failure to fully consider Miss X's circumstances when assessing her application amounts to fault. This fault has caused an injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman