Summary: The Council was at fault for the way it handled Ms X’s housing register application. This caused Ms X injustice as she was not able to bid on properties suitable for her household and then believed she had been offered permanent accommodation. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the way the Council handled her housing register application. Ms X says:
• The Council removed her and her two sons from the application, leaving only her husband.
• She was unable to bid from May 2017 until January 2021.
• She has not received a direct offer of accommodation from the Council following the end of the complaints procedure.

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. 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

4. As part of this investigation I considered the complaint made by Ms X and the information she provided. I discussed the complaint with Ms X over the telephone. I made enquires with the Council and considered the information received in response. I sent a draft of this decision to Ms X and the Council and considered comments received in response.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

5. 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))
6. 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))
7. The Council operates a choice based lettings policy where applicants can bid for properties advertised online.
8. The Council’s allocations policy (the Policy) also allows the Council to make direct offers of accommodation to an applicant. The Council has the power to make direct offers of accommodation to anyone registered on its housing register. But in particular, households with homelessness points.
9. The Policy says, direct offers will ordinarily be made to applicants with the highest priority. Where two or more applicants have the same priority, the Council will offer the property to the applicant with the earlier priority date. The Council may use direct offers to assist those households who have been waiting the longest, or to move people from temporary accommodation that needs to be vacated, or for other management reasons.

What happened

10. In 2014 the Council accepted a homelessness duty towards Ms X and her family and moved them into temporary accommodation. In 2016 the Council moved Ms X and her family into their current temporary accommodation. At this time Ms X was registered on the Council’s housing register and able to bid for properties. She was listed as needing a three bedroom property.
11. In May 2017 Ms X said she could no longer bid for properties on the housing register. Ms X said she contacted the Council about this many times but was told the Council was prioritising residences affected by the Grenfell Tower fire.
12. In September 2020 Ms X contacted the Council after receiving a letter which only showed her husband listed on her housing register application. Ms X said she contacted the Council to try and rectify this but was unsuccessful. Ms X contacted the Council again in October 2020 to ask it to fix her housing application.
13. In November 2020 Ms X made a formal complaint to the Council. Ms X said she cannot bid for properties and she and her two sons were removed from the housing application.
14. In December 2020 the Council provided its stage one response. The Council told Ms X her details should now be updated accordingly to show the correct household members on the application.
15. At the end of December 2020, Ms X asked the Council to consider her complaint at stage two. Ms X said she can still not log into her housing register account and cannot bid. She asked the Council why it changed her details in the first place.
16. On 14 January 2021 the housing team contacted Ms X and explained both she and her two sons were removed from the housing application in error in 2017. Ms X said to resolve the complaint she wanted the Council to offer her permanent accommodation. The housing team said it would look into this for Ms X.
17. On 15 January 2021 the Council provided its stage two response. The Council said due to an admin error in 2017, it removed Ms X and her two sons from her housing application, leaving only her husband. This affected the property size the family were eligible for. The Council said it corrected this error in December 2020 and apologised to Ms X. The Council also agreed to look at providing Ms X with a direct offer of accommodation.
18. On 26 January 2021 the Council made a direct offer of accommodation to Ms X. This was a three bedroom property with a housing association landlord. Ms X accepted the offer. However the offer was then withdrawn as the housing association did not accept Ms X’s household as needing a three bedroom property. The housing association’s policy said other household members aged 10 and over of the same sex are expected to share a bedroom. This meant Ms X’s two sons were expected to share a bedroom.
19. On 28 January 2021 Ms X spoke with her housing allocation officer from the Council. The officer told Ms X why the housing association had refused to accept Ms X for the property and said Ms X would not be penalised for the nomination failing as she accepted the property. The officer said the Council would continue to consider Ms X for a three bedroom property as a direct offer, however could not put a timeframe on how long it would take to make Ms X another direct offer.
20. In June 2021, Ms X asked the Council to consider her complaint at stage three of its complaints procedure as she had not received a further direct offer. The Council declined to consider the complaint at stage three due to the time passed.

Analysis

21. The Council was at fault for removing Ms X and her two sons from her housing application, leaving only her husband listed. The Council has recognised the fault, apologised and explained to Ms X this was an administrative error.
22. As a result of the fault Ms X was not able to bid for properties. In response to my enquiries the Council provided Ms X’s bidding history which shows which position her bids were coming at on properties she placed bids on. Both prior to the administrative error by the Council, and once the Council fixed this, Ms X’s bids were not coming near the top on any properties she placed bids on.
23. On balance I am satisfied even if the administrative error had not occurred it is unlikely Ms X would have successfully bid on a property. However Ms X is in a position where she believes she lost out on the opportunity to obtain permanent accommodation as she could not place bids. In addition, Ms X said she tried to contact the Council to get her application fixed but was not provided with help. While there is evidence Ms X contacted the Council in September and October 2020 to ask the Council to fix her housing application, it is not clear what the Council did following Ms X’s request. As a result Ms X made a formal complaint to get her housing application corrected.
24. While I accept the Council has acknowledged its fault and offered an apology to Ms X I do not think this goes far enough and it should make a payment to Ms X to reflect the distress, time and trouble she experienced in resolving this.
25. Ms X also complained the Council has not made her a direct offer of accommodation. In response to Ms X’s complaint the Council agreed to make Ms X a direct offer of accommodation. It did so in January 2021, but Ms X was not eligible for this property due to the housing association bedroom criteria. As a result Ms X believed she had obtained permanent accommodation, only to have this taken away. The Council has told Ms X it will consider her for a further direct offer in the future but cannot put a timeframe on this.
26. Since making this direct offer to Ms X the Council has provided details to me about the three bedroom properties it has directly offered to applicants. On each occasion the Council offered the property to an applicant with a higher priority than Ms X. Therefore I cannot say the Council is at fault for failing to make Ms X a further direct offer since January 2021.

Back to top

Agreed action

27. Within one month of my final decision, the Council agreed to carry out the following and provide evidence to the Ombudsman it has done so:
• Pay Ms X £200 to recognise the distress caused in the error with her housing application and for the time and trouble she spent in resolving this. The Council should also write to Ms X to confirm she is still on the direct offers list.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I have completed my investigation and found the Council was at fault which has caused Ms X injustice. The Council has agreed to the above action to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman