Summary: Miss B complains the Council failed to help her move to alternative social housing because of overcrowding and safety concerns. We do not find fault with the Council.

The complaint

1. Miss B complains the Council failed to help her when she asked to move to a new house because of overcrowding and safety concerns.
2. Miss B says the Council failed to:
• Award her sufficient priority on the housing register.
• Take her mental health issues into account.
• Handle her online housing register account correctly.
• Treat her safety concerns seriously.
• Respond to her calls and emails.
3. Miss B says because of the Council failures she is living in unsuitable and overcrowded accommodation. She says living in an area where she does not feel safe has a negative impact on her mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. 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)
6. 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)
7. We may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme,

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I spoke to Miss B and considered the information she provided. I made enquiries with the Council and considered its response with the relevant law and guidance.
9. Miss B and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I carefully considered the comments I received.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

10. 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)).
11. 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)).

12. Any decisions made about a housing application can be challenged by seeking a review with the council.

Council allocations policy

13. Applicants eligible for social housing are placed into one of four levels of priority:
• additional preference plus;
• additional preference;
• reasonable preference; or
• no preference.
14. An applicant will have a reasonable preference if they live in accommodation that is overcrowded in comparison to the Council’s size rules. Three points are awarded for each extra bedroom needed.
15. Once an applicants housing need is assessed their name is entered on the housing register. The Council may review an applicants housing need at any time. Applicants are required to re-apply annually.
16. An applicant will be automatically removed for the register in some circumstances, including failing to re-register annually.

What happened

17. Miss B had a previous housing register application in 2015. This case was cancelled because she failed to re-register in 2016.
18. Miss B submitted another application in June 2020. She included information for a medical assessment.
19. The Council decided Miss B did not have a priority based on any medical needs. It awarded her reasonable preference because of overcrowding and awarded six points for the two extra bedrooms it said she needed.
20. Miss B complained to the Council about her priority level and difficulties using the online system. The Council responded at stage one of its complaint process in June 2020 and stage two (final) in August 2020. The Council apologised for the difficulties she experienced. It explained this was because she had two online accounts with different reference numbers. It explained the priority level and did not uphold this part of her complaint.
21. Miss B remained unhappy with the Councils response and complained to us in October 2020.

My findings

22. I do not find fault with the way the Council responded when Miss B approached it for help with her housing situation. I will address each part of Miss B’s complaint under the main headings:

The Council failed to award her sufficient priority on the housing register

23. There was no fault in the way the Council decided Miss B’s priority level. It awarded additional points for overcrowding in line with its allocations policy.
24. It considered Miss B’s medical evidence and asked its independent medical advisor to review the case. It decided Miss B did not have a medical priority. Where there is no fault in the way the Council reaches its decision we would not question the professional judgement of the officer.

The Council failed to take her mental health issues into account

25. There is no evidence to support this part of Miss B’s complaint. Miss B included this information on the medical assessment form and sent supporting information from her consultant. The Council considered all the information Miss B provided and sent it to the independent medical advisor for review.

The Council mishandled her online housing register account

26. The Council did not mishandle Miss B’s online account. Difficulties arose because Miss B had two online accounts. When Miss B contacted the Council it explained which account she needed to use.
27. In its complaint response the Council apologised for the frustration Miss B experienced using the online account and contacting the Council for advice.

The Council failed to treat her safety concerns seriously

28. I did not find evidence to support this part of Miss B’s complaint. The Council did listen to Miss B’s concerns. It gathered information from the domestic abuse service and Police. It summarised her concerns and provided her with information about advice and support services.
29. Miss B wanted the Council to move her to a different area so she could move away from her ex-partner and be closer to her family. The Council explained why it was unable to do this in the social housing sector but gave her information about how it could support her to secure a privately rented property.

The Council failed to respond to her calls and emails

30. The Council provided evidence of its communication with Miss B. It responded to her emails and phone calls. It followed up on the actions it agreed in its complaint responses.
31. It apologised for any delay she experienced in part of 2020 when officers moved to work at home due to COVID-19.

Summary

32. We recognise the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. We may not find fault with a council for failing to re-house someone if it has prioritised applicants and allocated properties according to its published lettings scheme policy. This is the case in Miss B’s situation.

Back to top

Final decision

33. I do not find fault with the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman