Summary: There was delay by the Council in assessing an application to join the housing register. There was also fault, in that a review of Miss X’s housing band decision lacked clarity. New information then meant Miss X’s housing priority increased. Backdating her award date for the new housing priority band by almost 2 months remedies her injustice from her complaint about delay, as it is unlikely Miss X missed any housing offers.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Miss X, complains about the housing priority the Council gave her is too low. Miss X says that she believes she should have greater medical priority as her family of 2 adults and 2 children are sharing a bedroom.
2. Miss X also complains there was delay by the Council in assessing her application to join the housing register. Miss X says that sharing one room is affecting her families health.

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 presented by Miss X and discussed the complaint with her.
6. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
7. 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

8. Miss X and her family share one bedroom in a three bedroom house, shared with relatives. Miss X applied to join the housing register in June 2019. The Council asked for more documents in February 2020 and says her housing application was inactive until February 2020.
9. The Council accepted Miss X onto the Council’s housing register with an award date of July 2020. The Council has said that ‘unfortunately there was a 13 month delay. This delay was a result of the high volume of applications received and limited staff capacity’.
10. In July 2020 the Council placed her application in band 3 because of overcrowding and said she could bid on properties with 2 bedrooms. The Council also explained that if she because homeless she should contact the Council for a housing needs assessment.
11. Miss X asked for a review of the decision, as she believed she should have greater medical priority. The review said that officers considered:
• Letters from the GP which confirmed Miss X’s children had been diagnosed with various infections, but the GP did not provide evidence how Miss X’s current flat was impacting their condition.
• A letter from the GP confirming that Miss X had been diagnosed with anxiety issues and recent next and back strain. The Council said ‘while the Doctor has confirmed he believes that Miss X’s current housing maybe the cause of these medical issues, there is no evidence to confirm that Miss X’s current property directly contributes to her medical conditions and is impacting on her ability to remain living there’.

The Council explained in the letter that it needed evidence the applicant’s accommodation was having a detrimental impact on their condition and it is a contributory factor on their ability to remain living at their accommodation. The Council said without the above evidence it could not assess about the impact of Miss X’s medical condition.

12. In response to my enquiries, the Council has said that it could not verify that all four of the letters from November 2019 until September 2020 were considered at the review in November 2020. The Council also said in its response to my enquiries that it accepted its review decision lacked clarity. So, it has said it will carry out a fresh review.
13. Miss X sent further medical information after September 2020. The Council has said it reviewed this information and it awarded Miss X Band 2 from March 2021.

Allocations policy

14. The Council places applications in one of four bands:
• Band 1 – exceptional housing need due to threat to life, domestic violence, emergency such as fire, referrals from the police due to threats.
• Band 2 – reasonable preference due to unsatisfactory accommodation due to overcrowding by 2 bedrooms, permanently lacking a bathroom or kitchen or medical or disability reasons. The policy says ‘ if an applicants housing is unsuitable for severe medical reasons…….However, their housing condition directly contribute to causing serious ill health and the condition of the property cannot be resolved within a reasonable period of time. Circumstances will be assessed by a relevant officer of the Council and may need to be referred to a relevant Council advisor, depending upon the circumstances’. The Council gives examples for band 2 which include severe chest conditions requiring hospitalisation due to chronic damp, substantial adaptations to a property for a severe disability cannot be made or a person suffering with a diagnosed mental illness where the medical condition would be significantly improved by a move to alternative accommodation.
• Band 3 – Overcrowding by 1 bedroom.
• Band 4 – applicants with no reasonable preference.

My finding

15. I find the delay in assessing Miss X’s housing application was fault. In its reply to my enquiries, the Council accepted this and agreed to backdate Miss X’s housing application award date for Band 3 to August 2019.
16. There was also fault, as the Council’s review decision of November 2020 lacked clarity. The Council agreed to carry out a further review.
17. This further review occurred after Miss X put in new information and this resulted in the Council placing her in band 2 in March 2021. This decision was upheld on review by the Council in May 2021.
18. The reviews that occurred in March and May 2021 contain new information to that of November 2020. So, I cannot say that Miss X should have been placed in band 2 before March 2021. However, the Council has said to compensate for any disadvantage Miss X may have experienced from the delay in assessment, the Council proposes the new band 2 award date of 24 March is backdated to 1 February 2021.
19. Miss X has said that she is unhappy with band 2. However, the Council has reviewed its decision and I cannot see that she has provided evidence of exceptional housing need due to threat to life, domestic violence or an emergency such as fire that would place her in band 1. So, I can see no fault with the Council’s decision on her current housing band. If Miss X believes the Council did not carry out the review in May 2021 correctly she can put in a further complaint but without evidence of exceptional housing need I cannot see the Council would place her in band 1.
20. I have looked at all the information and I consider the Council’s backdating of Miss X’s award date for band 2 is a satisfactory remedy to her complaint about the lack of clarity at the review. It is likely the increased band was awarded in March 2021 due to the new information rather than the review of the November 2020 decision and so I consider backdating the band 2 award by almost 2 months is a fitting remedy.
21. I now have to consider whether Miss X missed any offers of housing. The Council has sent me her bidding history from March 2021 onwards when she was in band 2. This shows that highest position in the queue she was in was 216. So, it seems unlikely that if she had been able to bid in February 2021 she would have received an offer of housing. So, I do not propose an extra remedy above the extra 2 months the Council has backdated her award date.

Agreed action

22. The Council should backdate Miss X’s housing band 2 award date to 1 February 2021 within one month of the date of this decision.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I have completed my investigation of this complaint. This complaint is upheld and I consider the fault to Miss X is remedied by the Council’s proposed actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman