Summary: Miss C complained the Council refused her housing application based on incorrect information and delayed awarding her the right housing priority. Miss C says she experienced distress and injury because she had to live in an unsuitable property. We found fault with the Council because it delayed referring Miss C to its Housing Options Team to make a homelessness application. The Council will make a financial payment to Miss C to remedy the injustice caused by its fault.

The complaint

1. Miss C, with the support of a representative Mr B, complained the Council refused her housing application based on incorrect information and delayed awarding her the right housing priority. She also complained the Council delayed providing her with adult social care support.
2. Mr B said the delay caused Miss C distress and injury because she had to live in an unsuitable property.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I did not investigate Miss C’s complaint the Council shared inaccurate information about her subletting her property and having rent arrears. This matter was considered by the Information Commissioner’s Officer.
4. I considered the complaint from July 2020 to July 2021. Miss C can make a new complaint to the Council about its actions from August 2021 onwards.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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)
6. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), as amended)
7. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
8. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.
9. 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

10. I considered:
• Miss C complaint and the information provided by Mr B;
• documents supplied by the Council;
• relevant legislation and guidelines; and
• the Council’s policies and procedures.
11. Mr B, Miss C and the Council commented on a draft decision. I considered their comments before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and Guidance

Housing scheme

12. A local housing authority must have an allocation scheme for deciding priorities and allocating accommodation. (Housing Act 1996 s.166A (1,3) and s.167 (1, 2))
13. Under Part 6 of the Housing Act 1996 applicants for housing have the right to request a review of any decision made about their application. The review must be undertaken by an officer more senior to the one who made the original decision.

Council’s housing scheme

14. Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council is a member of a sub-regional choice based lettings scheme, known as Property Pool Plus (PPP). One Vision Housing (OVH) administers the scheme on behalf of the Council. Below is information relevant to this complaint from the schemes policy.
15. Applicants are asked to provide current information to confirm the circumstances of all household members before the application can be checked and assessed. Applicants may be asked to provide references; these may be from a current or previous landlord.
16. Applicants can request a registration decision is reviewed. The review procedure has two stages:
• Stage one: The review is carried out by an officer who was not involved in the original decision, and who is more senior than the officer making the original decision. A response will be provided within 15 working days of the request being received.
• Stage two: The review is carried out by a panel of officers from the PPP scheme. Whenever possible a meeting will be convened within 15 working days of the acknowledgement letter being issued, however this period may need to be extended to a maximum of 31 days. The decision will be provided in writing within 10 working days of the meeting.
17. Applicants must have arrears of less than £400 to be able to bid on properties on the letting scheme. Housing related debts owed to a landlord equivalent to 8 weeks gross rent or greater will lead to a new or already registered application being disqualified from the Scheme. The application will be disqualified until such time as the applicant can provide evidence of having adhered to an agreed repayment plan for a minimum of 52 weeks or having reduced the debt to below the equivalent of 8 weeks gross rent.
18. Applicants indicating the need for support to take part in the PPP Scheme will be offered help and assistance by the Administering Scheme Partners. This need may be due to a physical disability, learning disability, illness, language difficulty or for any other reason that may make it harder for someone to participate in the Scheme.
19. The scheme says every effort will be made to identify applicants where threatened homelessness may be prevented. Applicants’ details will be forwarded to the Council’s Housing Options Team who will contact the applicant giving advice and assistance.

Homelessness

20. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
21. The Code says applications can be made to any department of the authority 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.
22. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the Council:
• he or she is likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• he or she has been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5))
23. If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must take a homelessness application and make inquiries. The threshold for taking an application is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular council department. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5) 
24. Under the relief duty councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

Care Act Assessment

25. Councils must undertake an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support, regardless of whether the council thinks the individual has eligible needs or of their financial situation. (Care Act 2014)

What happened

26. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
27. Miss C was living in a one-bedroom flat on the first floor. This was a private tenancy. Miss C is disabled and cannot read or write.

Housing and homelessness applications

28. Mr B contacted PPP to support Miss C to apply for the housing register in July 2020. He explained to PPP he was helping Miss C with the application because she had communication needs. PPP phoned Miss C so she could make a housing application over the phone. Her housing application form notes she wanted to move for health reasons, to live independently, because she could not afford her rent and was threatened of eviction. She advised PPP she had current and former rent arrears and a payment plan was in place.
29. PPP emailed Mr B a letter for Miss C in July 2020. It asked her for her landlord’s reference. It said if it did not receive the reference within 21 days it may close her housing application.
30. In August 2020, PPP emailed Mr B a letter for Miss C. It said it could not assess and activate Miss C’s housing application until it had a reference from her landlord. It advised if it did not receive the reference within 21 days it may close her housing application.
31. Mr B complained to PPP that it was treating Miss C unfairly by refusing her access to social housing because she did not have a reference from her landlord.
32. The Council closed Miss C’s housing application in November 2020 because it had not received the information it needed to complete eligibility checks, namely a reference from her landlord.
33. Mr B contacted PPP in January 2021. He asked if it could consider Miss C for a ground floor flat that had become available. PPP told Mr B it needed proof of Miss C’s last 6 months rent payments or a reference from her landlord, plus proof of residence for the last three months. It said Miss C needed to provide these before the end of February 2021 for it to reopen her application.
34. PPP made enquiries of Miss C’s previous landlord, OVH. OVH confirmed Miss C had substantial arrears. OVH said it was unlikely to offer Miss C a property given the amount of her arrears.
35. Mr B said he wanted to complain about how PPP and OVH handled Miss C’s housing application and breaches of confidentiality. OVH started a complaint investigation.
36. PPP phoned Miss C in February 2021 to discuss her case. She gave PPP her landlord’s contact information. PPP asked Miss C’s landlord to give her a reference and reopened her housing application.
37. OVH responded to Miss C’s stage one complaint. It advised it needed a reference from her landlord to consider her application. It explained a landlord reference was required to complete the eligibility and qualification checks to meet the criteria set out in the allocations scheme policy. Namely, unacceptable behaviour, regarding housing related debt and anti-social behaviour. OVH noted she answered ‘yes’ to owing rent arrears. It did not uphold her complaint. It told her it had contacted her landlord and was waiting for them to return the outstanding reference form.
38. PPP considered Miss C’s case at stage one of the appeal procedure. It explained it had followed its policy and did not uphold her appeal.
39. PPP held a stage two appeal review meeting in March 2021. It did not uphold her appeal. It wrote to her and told her it could not process her housing application until it had a reference from her landlord. It told her to contact PPP if there were reasons she could not supply a reference. The Council signposted her to the Ombudsman.
40. In March 2021, Miss C told the Council she was homeless. The Council accepted the relief duty for Miss C because it considered her property unsuitable for her needs. It wrote to Miss C and explained it owed her the relief duty and what this meant. It said it had secured interim accommodation for her. Miss C decided to remain in her property until she could move into suitable temporary accommodation.
41. PPP accepted Miss C’s housing application in April 2021. Housing Options awarded her band A urgent priority for properties in Sefton based on her medical needs under its homeless relief duty.
42. Mr B complained to the Council about its lack of action. In May 2021, the Council held a multi-disciplinary meeting. Attendees included the Council’s Housing Options Team and adult social care. It was agreed the Housing Options Team would apply to remove Miss C’s outstanding arrears with OVH. OVH agreed to waive £3500 of Miss C’s outstanding debt. This left her with £360 of arrears.
43. Miss C viewed a property in May 2021 and accepted the tenancy. The Council wrote to Miss C and told her its relief duty had ended because she had accepted the tenancy and the property would be available to her for at least six months.

Social care

44. Mr B contacted the Council in June 2020 about Miss C. He raised concerns about her being unable to pay her rent and not being able to afford to put her heating on. He also said she was prone to falls and had fallen down the stairs at her property twice. Miss C’s Councillor referred her to the Council because she was prone to falls. The Council referred Miss C to its occupational therapy department and for an advocate.
45. The Council’s occupational therapy department tried to contact Miss C in June and July 2020. It closed her case in because it could not contact her.
46. In September 2020, Miss C asked the Council to assess her because she was struggling with her mobility. Mr B also contacted the Council. He said she was struggling to access her prescriptions and was waiting for an occupational therapy assessment. The Council referred her to the occupational therapy department. The department contacted Miss C and asked if she wanted adaptations to her property. She declined because she was hoping to move to a new property.
47. In October 2020, the Council’s adult social care department received another referral for Miss C from her Councillor. A social worker completed a Care Act assessment in November 2020. Miss C asked for support with housing. She said she was independent with daily living tasks. The social worker referred her to a support organisation. The support organisation met with Miss C and agreed to help her with housing, arrears and getting an occupational therapy assessment. Miss C told the organisation she got enough help with her literacy difficulties and shopping from her friends.
48. In February 2021, Miss C’s Councillor contacted the Council for an update. Social care explained it completed a Care Act assessment for Miss C and referred her to a support organisation. The social worker contacted the support organisation to see how the work was progressing. She re-referred Miss C because her support worker had left and there had been no progress with her case.
49. A social worker contacted Miss C. Miss C said she would like help with shopping and accessing her money. The social worker supported her to move to a doctor’s surgery nearer to her home and asked it to refer her for an occupational therapy assessment. The social worker referred her for a benefits review. Miss C told the social worker she did not want an advocate.
50. The occupational therapy department contacted Miss C. She declined an assessment because she was hoping to move. Miss C told the department she would contact them when she had moved.
51. The support organisation arranged for Miss C to access a shopping service and for her prescriptions to be delivered to her home. Miss C said she did not need any more support from the organisation.
52. In May 2021, the social worker wrote a letter of support for Miss C for a tenancy with a housing association. Miss C said she did not need any more support from the adult social care department.
53. In June 2021, the social worker told the support organisation, Miss C’s doctor and occupational therapy Miss C was moving to a new tenancy. The social worker and support organisation helped Miss C to move.

Analysis

54. When Miss C applied to join the housing register in July 2020, she told PPP she was at risk of eviction. PPP should have referred Miss C to the Council’s Housing Options Team. There is no evidence PPP made this referral and this was fault.
55. Miss C’s circumstances did not change between July 2020 and March 2021, therefore, on the balance of probabilities, if PPP had referred her to the Council’s Housing Options Team in July 2020, on the balance of probabilities, it would have decided it owed her the relief duty and taken the same action as it did between March and May 2021.
56. PPPs failure to refer Miss C to the Council’s Housing Options Team created an eight-month delay. As a result, Miss C was housed in unsuitable accommodation for eight months longer than she would have done without the fault. During this time, Miss C struggled to live in the property safely causing her distress and injury.
57. I did not find any delay with the Council offering Miss C a Care Act assessment and social care support. The Council could not provide a service sooner because it could not contact Miss C, and then she wanted to wait until she moved for the assessment. When Miss C was ready to work with the Council, it completed a Care Act assessment and secured support to meet her eligible needs.

Back to top

Agreed action

58. When a council commissions another organisation to provide services on its behalf it remains responsible for those services and for the actions of the organisation providing them. So, although I found fault with the actions of PPP, I made recommendations to the Council.
59. Within one month of the final decision, the Council will:
• Pay Miss C £250 per month for the eight-month delay in considering whether the Council owed her a duty under the Housing Act 1996. This can be credited to any outstanding arrears Miss C may have.
60. Within two months of the final decision, the Council will:
• Provide PPP staff with training about homelessness and what action to take if they suspect someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness.
61. The Council should provide the Ombudsman with evidence these actions have been completed.

Back to top

Final decision

62. I have completed my investigation and uphold Miss C’s complaint. Miss C was caused an injustice by the actions of the Council. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

63. I did not investigate Miss C’s complaint the Council shared inaccurate information about her. This matter was considered by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman