Summary: Ms Y complained about the way the Council assessed her housing application. The Ombudsman has found fault by the Council, causing injustice. It has agreed to remedy this by making an apology, a payment to reflect the distress, time and trouble caused, and re-assessing Ms Y’s application.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I am calling Ms Y, complained about the way the Council processed and assessed her housing application.
2. She says its decision not to accept her onto its housing register was unfair. She qualified for inclusion on the register at the time she applied and is still in the same situation. Ms Y wants the Council to reconsider her application.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
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 spoke to Ms Y, made enquiries of the Council and read the information Ms Y and the Council have provided about the complaint.
6. I invited Ms Y and the Council to comment on a draft version of this decision. I considered their responses before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Council’s Housing Allocations Scheme

7. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme setting out the way it determines priorities, and its procedures, for allocating social housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
8. The Council’s allocation scheme says:

• Applicants can apply for an allocation by completing a housing application. Once a fully completed application has been received, along with the required supporting documentation, the application will be assessed to determine if the applicant is eligible and qualifies for an allocation.
• Applicants who have been assessed as eligible and who qualify will be assessed for housing need.
• It is required by law to determine the relative priority awarded to housing applicants. These priorities – the statutory reasonable preference categories – are set out in section 166A of the Housing Act 1996. The Council has also exercised its legal discretion to include local priorities alongside the statutory reasonable preference categories.
• The Council has a Priority Banding System - Bands 1 to 4 - for these statutory reasonable preference and local priority categories.
• An applicant will be assessed as having a housing need if they come within one of the statutory reasonable preference or local priority categories. The applicant will then be accepted on to the housing register and placed in the appropriate priority band.
• An applicant may be assessed as having a housing need, an award of reasonable preference made and the applicant placed in Band 2 under the Ready to move on from Council Accredited Supported Scheme (the Move-on scheme). This is for applicants who occupy named supported housing projects but only if they have been assessed as:
1. Being in need of long term rather than short term on-going tenancy support
2. Being ready to move to independent accommodation
3. Having a support package (if required) that has been assessed and is in place
4. Having a vulnerability whereby accommodation in the private rented sector would, through its short term, have a detrimental effect on their vulnerability.

9. The Council told us, in its response to our enquires, for it to assess whether to award an applicant reasonable preference under the Move-on scheme, their application must be supported by a Move- on referral form completed by their support worker. This form contains specific questions, the answers to which enable the Council to determine whether the applicant meets the criteria for an award under the scheme.
10. The law and guidance do not set out a timescale for processing applications. Nor does the Council’s allocations policy. But we expect councils to deal with applications in a timely manner. Four to six weeks is what we consider an appropriate time to process applications.

What happened

11. I have set out a summary of the key events below, based on the information provided to me. It is not meant to show everything that happened.
12. Ms Y has been living in a supported living scheme provided by a housing association (the HA) since early 2019. Up until December 2019, the HA was part of the Move-on scheme.
13. The HA left the Move-on scheme in December 2019. But the Council agreed to honour applications from those living in its accredited properties at the time their application was made, because of its long delays in processing applications.

Ms Y’s housing application

14. Ms Y’s housing application was submitted to the Council on 15 March 2019. It was completed on her behalf by one of the HA’s support workers whose name and contact details were provided with the application. It confirmed Ms Y’s landlord as the HA, she was applying for accommodation and had a housing need under the Move-on scheme.
15. After submitting the application, Ms Y moved to other accommodation provided by the HA under the supported living scheme. When the Council updated her address details on her application in July 2019, it also noted the “Move-on” referral form had not yet been provided. A few days later Ms Y and her support worker called the Council to check the progress of her application. They were told there were long assessment times. Ms Y called again to chase progress in September. She was told her application had not yet been processed and there was a backlog.
16. There is no record the Council told Ms Y or her support worker in the calls in July and September about the requirement to submit the Move-on form with Ms Y’s application.
17. The Council did not start its assessment of Ms Y’s application until 15 April 2020, more than a year after it had been submitted. A housing officer told Ms Y by email the Council required a Move-on form from her support worker.
18. Ms Y replied by email on 23 April. She said the HA support workers were not available due to the Covid-19 pandemic and it was hard for her to get hold of them because she was currently stuck overseas for the same reason. She asked for more time to get a support worker to help with the form. She asked the Council to contact her by email for any updates.
19. A housing officer assessed Ms Y’s application on 15 June. The Move-on form had not yet been received and Ms Y was assessed as having no housing need. The Council said in its decision on her housing application Ms Y did not qualify to join the housing register, according to the information provided, because she did not have any recognised housing need or priority to qualify for social housing.
20. Ms Y asked the Council to review its decision on 23 June. Her request was supported by a letter from an HA officer who confirmed Ms Y was currently living in accommodation sharing facilities with other residents which was having a negative impact on her mental wellbeing. The accommodation had been part of the accredited scheme and as such Ms Y should be accepted onto the housing register and placed in a priority band.
21. On 22 July the Council issued its review decision. It said the HA address at which Ms Y was living was no longer part of the accredited scheme, Ms Y did not have any recognised housing need under the new scheme and was deemed as adequately housed.
22. Ms Y complained to us in April 2021.
23. The Council told us, in response to the complaint, Ms Y was assessed as having no housing need because the Move-on form had not been provided. The HA officer’s letter submitted for the review was not in the specified form and did not provide the required information.

Analysis – was there fault by the Council causing injustice?

Delay

24. The Council took over a year – from March 2019 to June 2020 - to assess Ms Y’s application. I appreciate the Council handles a high volume of applications. But, in my view, it did not process Ms Y’s application within a reasonable timeframe, which we consider to be within four to six weeks. This is fault. Ms Y was caused time and trouble chasing the application and distress and uncertainty by having to wait so long for a decision.

The assessment of Ms Y’s application

25. The Council noted in July 2019, the required Move-on form completed by Ms Y’s support worker had not been submitted with the application. It had the support worker and the HA’s contact details. It spoke to Ms Y and her support worker in July and September 2019 but made no reference to, or request for, the completed form.
26. In my view it was fault by the Council not to contact the HA to ask for the form in July 2019 when it noted it had not been provided. And fault not to raise this when it spoke to Ms Y and the support worker in July and September 2019. Had it done so, I consider it more likely than not, the support worker would have arranged to submit a completed form before the Council assessed the application in June 2020.
27. Ms Y told the Council in April 2020 about her difficulties contacting her support worker because of the Covid-19 pandemic. I have not seen any response by the Council to Ms Y. It did not provide her with information about the Move-on form, why it was required or any date by which it had to be provided. It went ahead with the assessment without any further contact with Ms Y. I consider this was fault by the Council.
28. Because the Council did not have the information it needed (which would have been provided in the Move-on form) to assess whether Ms Y met the criteria for an award under the Move-on scheme, it decided she had no housing need.
29. The Council did not explain why or how it had come to this view in its decision letter, or that it did not have the required information because it had not received form. I consider this was fault. Had it explained its decision, Ms Y would have had a further opportunity to ask her support worker to complete and submit the form for the review, instead of the letter, which did not include the required information.
30. I also consider it was wrong for the Council to say, in its review decision, Ms Y’s application had been refused because her HA address was no longer part of the Move-on scheme. It was at the time of Ms Y’s application in March 2019 and the Council had agreed to honour such applications. And the Council has now told us it decided Ms Y had no housing need because it did not have the required Move-on form.
31. I cannot say what decision the Council would have made had it received the completed form before assessing Ms Y’s application. But, in my view, because of these faults, Ms Y lost the opportunity to have her application properly considered and assessed with the required information.

Back to top

Agreed action

32. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults, and within four weeks from the date of our final decision, the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Ms Y for the delay in processing her application and failure to raise the issue of the Move-on form with her and the HA at an appropriate time.
• Pay Ms Y £250 to reflect the avoidable distress and inconvenience these faults caused her.
• This figure is a symbolic amount based on the Ombudsman’s published Guidance on Remedies.
• Contact the HA and ask it to complete and return the required Move-on form and then re-assess Ms Y’s application.
• Provide us with evidence it has carried out these actions.

33. If after the re-assessment of her application, the Council awards Ms Y reasonable preference under the Move-on scheme and accepts her onto the housing register with the correct band and date, it should consider an appropriate remedy for her lost opportunity to bid for a property.

Back to top

Final decision

34. I have found fault by the Council causing injustice. I have completed my investigation on the basis the Council will take the above action as a suitable way of remedying the injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman