Summary: There was fault by the Council when dealing with a housing transfer application. There was delay and poor communication, and the Council did not carry out a home visit according to its policy. The Council’s apology and reassessment of the application according to its policy remedies the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr X, complains the Council did not follow its transfer procedure when deciding that he was adequately housed.
2. Mr X says the Council did not carry out a home visit which it says it will under its policy and took too long in dealing with his application. Mr X says that this has affected his health and he disagrees with the Council’s final decision to reject his housing transfer application.

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 read the papers put in by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him.
6. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
7. Mr 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

8. Mr X applied for a housing transfer in July 2019 due to ill health, disabilities and unsuitability of his current housing. After carrying out an assessment, the Council wrote to Mr X in November 2019 to say that it was unable to offer any help with rehousing as it considered his current home was suitable for his needs. The Council told Mr X he may be able to organise his own mutual exchange.
9. Mr X asked for a review of the decision on 18 December. The Council acknowledged this and said it would complete the review by 12 February 2020. On 4 March the Council wrote to Mr X and said that his appeal was not upheld.
10. The Council has accepted it was at fault. It has said that it did not follow its transfer procedure when deciding whether Mr X was adequately housed. The Council has apologised to Mr X and said that to remedy this fault, it will reassess his transfer application according to the procedure and carry out a home visit. The Council has said that it also intends to look again at the wording of its transfer procedure.
11. Mr X complained about the time it took for the Council to deal with his application and his subsequent complaint. The Council upheld his complaint that the officer responding to his stage 1 complaint should not have done so as she had been previously involved in his case. The Council also said that communication between the Council and Mr X should have been better. In its response to Mr X’s stage one complaint the Council apologised for any frustration Mr X had experienced as a result of unanswered and delayed communications. The Council also apologised for the time it took to process Mr X’s transfer application.
12. I have found fault with the Council. There was delay and poor communication when dealing with Mr X’s housing transfer application. The Council also failed to carry out the home visit referred to in its policy. I consider the Council’s apology (which has already been given to Mr X in its response to his official complaint) and its offer to reassess the housing transfer application remedies the injustice caused to him. If the review results in Mr X’s housing transfer application being successful, I would expect it to be backdated to the date he first applied, unless the change in decision is the result of recent information.
13. Mr X says that he would like a financial payment for the delay and for the Council to make him an offer of accommodation now. Until the reassessment is carried out it is not possible to know whether the Council will change its decision on the transfer application. If Mr X’s housing transfer reassessment results in him joining the housing transfer register and he has missed out on offers of accommodation, then I would expect the Council to make a financial payment in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance.

Agreed action

14. That the Council will reassess Mr X’s transfer application within two months of the date of the decision on this complaint. If the reassessment concludes Mr X is entitled to join the housing register, the Council should consider if he has missed out on offers on accommodation and consider making a financial payment in line with the LGO guidance on remedies.
15. That the Council will reconsider (and alter if needed) the wording of its housing transfer policy in relation to home visits within two months of the date of the decision on this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

16. I have completed my investigation of this complaint. This complaint is upheld. I consider the remedy outlined above remedies the injustice caused to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman