Summary: Mr X complained the Council’s lettings policy unfairly favoured Council tenants over housing association tenants wanting to move home and the Council should have rehoused him sooner. We found no fault with the Council’s policy or how the Council applied it to Mr X so we completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the way the Council applied its lettings policy unfairly excluded the sub-group of applicants the Council placed him in. He said no four- or five-bedroom properties had been advertised for his sub-group in 2020. As a result, Mr X said he lived in overcrowded accommodation for longer than he should have, causing avoidable stress for his family and impacting his mental health. He also said the Council did not tell him about the sub-groups when it gave him the highest priority, so he thought this meant he would be rehoused quickly. He wanted the Council to house him, provide a financial remedy for the distress caused to him and his family and change its lettings policy so all subgroups are treated equally.

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. 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 considered the information provided by Mr X and discussed his complaint with him.
6. I considered the Council’s comments on the complaint and the supporting information it provided.
7. I considered the relevant law, guidance and Council policy.
8. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered the comments I received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

9. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. Councils must allocate housing in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
10. 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; and
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others.

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

11. The Localism Act 2011 introduced new freedoms to allow councils to better manage their waiting list and to tailor their allocation priorities to meet local needs. Councils can give extra priority to certain groups of people, so long as this does not dominate the allocations scheme.

The Council’s lettings policy

12. The Council is a partner in a local choice-based lettings scheme which enables housing applicants to bid for available properties which are advertised.
13. The Council allocates applicants for housing to one of three groups:
• Transfer – existing Council and housing association tenants already living in the Council’s area.
• Homeless – applicants who the Council has accepted are homeless.
• Home seeker – most other applicants for housing in the Council’s area.
14. Within each group there are several sub-groups, which the Council says it uses only for monitoring purposes.
15. The Council also assigns each applicant a priority band (A – D) based on the severity of their housing need. It offers each property to the bidder with the highest band, who has had this band for the longest time and is eligible for the property under its lettings policy.
16. The Council operates a ‘Street Purchase’ scheme where it buys properties from the open market. The Council says the aim of this scheme is to reduce the amount of temporary accommodation needed for homeless households.
17. To meet the aims of the scheme, the Council’s lettings policy says it lets properties bought through the ‘Street Purchase’ scheme either to Homeless applicants or its own tenants in the Transfer group. The Council says this is to ensure that it can let any resulting empty Council property to Homeless applicants.

What happened

18. Mr X is a housing association tenant living in the Council’s area. He says he needs a larger property for his family.
19. Mr X applied to join the Council’s housing register in September 2019. The Council decided he was eligible to bid on four or five-bedroom properties and placed him in the Transfer group. As a housing association tenant, the Council says it counts Mr X in the ‘RSL’ Transfer sub-group for monitoring purposes.
20. In December 2019, the Council awarded Mr X Band A priority after confirming Mr X needed to move on welfare grounds.
21. Between December 2019 and October 2020, Mr X bid on 13 properties through the Council’s choice-based letting scheme. However, Mr X was not successful in any of these bids. In five cases the property was a ‘Street Purchase’ property which Mr X was not eligible for under the Council’s lettings policy. In the other seven cases, although Mr X was in the highest band (Band A), other bidders had held Band A status for longer.
22. Mr X complained to the Council in September 2020 that the Council’s letting policy was unfair and it was prioritising other people for properties over him outside its lettings policy.
23. The Council said it checked Mr X’s bids and decided it had assessed his bids for properties in line with its policy. It apologised for the time Mr X had been waiting for a new home but explained this was due to a shortage of suitable housing and the number of applicants.
24. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman in November 2020 that the Council applied its lettings policy unfairly and advertised some properties only for Council tenants or homeless applicants. Mr X says this disadvantaged housing association tenants on the Council’s waiting list.

My findings

25. The Ombudsman recognises 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 policy.
26. Councils can give extra priority to certain groups provided this does not dominate the reasonable preference it has to give to the categories of people set out in the law.
27. In response to my enquiries, the Council provided statistics for properties it advertised and let between December 2019 and December 2020.
• Of 406 properties the Council advertised, 264 properties were available to all applicants in the Transfer group. The Council prioritised adverts for only 17 properties to either Council transfer or homeless applicants.
• There were eight properties with four or five bedrooms advertised in the period. The Council prioritised three of these adverts for Transfer applicants who were existing Council tenants and one to Homeless applicants. The other four properties were available to all Transfer applicants.
• The Council let five properties with four or five bedrooms to applicants in the Transfer group in the period. Of these, it let two properties to existing Council tenants and three to Housing Association tenants.
28. Based on these figures, I am satisfied the Council’s ‘Street Purchase’ scheme does not dominate the reasonable preference it must give to the required groups.
29. The Council provided details of the properties Mr X had bid on which showed that, while Mr X was near the top of the list of applicants, he was not the highest placed bidder in 12 of the 13 bids. For the other bid, he was not eligible for the property under the Council’s lettings policy.
30. The Council also provided details of the properties let to successful applicants between December 2019 and December 2020. This shows that all successful Band A applicants had held Band A status for longer than Mr X.
31. Based on this evidence, I am satisfied the Council applied its lettings policy correctly to Mr X’s bids and the time Mr X has been waiting to be rehoused is not due to fault by the Council.
32. The Council’s policy also says it will tell applicants which group they are in, but it does not say the Council will tell them which sub-group. Since the Council does not routinely use sub-groups when assessing bids, the Council was not at fault for not telling Mr X of his sub-group sooner.

Back to top

Final decision

33. I have completed my investigation. There was no fault in how the Council prioritised applicants for ‘Street Purchase’ properties or how it applied its lettings policy to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman