Summary: There was no fault in the way the Council decided that Mr B did not qualify to join the housing register.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains about the way the Council dealt with his housing and homelessness applications. In particular, he complains that the Council decided he had no housing needs and no right to housing.
2. Mr B says that as a result of this, he remained living in unsuitable accommodation for several years which affected his mental health.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have investigated events since January 2020. I have not investigated earlier events for the reasons explained in the last section of this statement.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. 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)
6. 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

7. I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• discussed the issues with the complainant;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council has provided; and
• given the Council and the complainant the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background and key events

8. Mr B had been living in a privately rented flat since April 2016. After Mr B was served with an eviction notice in 2019, he made housing and homelessness applications to the Council.
9. An Occupational Therapist (OT) visited Mr B at his home to carry out an assessment because he had indicated on his application that he had mobility needs. There were four steps to access the building and then two flights of internal steps to access his flat. The OT considered Mr B did not have a substantial level of need and did not qualify for a mobility award. She noted that Mr B should not be offered a property with more than two external steps, but she did not recommend that he needed a level internal layout.
10. The Council wrote to Mr B with its decision that he did not qualify to join the housing register. Mr B asked the Council to review its decision.
11. In December 2019, the Council’s homelessness team was notified that Mr B had moved into supported accommodation. It then wrote to Mr B with its decision on his homelessness application. It said that it owed Mr B a duty to take reasonable steps to help him resolve his homelessness but that duty had come to an end because he had been able to find other accommodation. Mr B did not request a review of the decision.
12. In February 2020, the Council considered Mr B’s request for a review of its decision that he did not qualify to join the housing register. It decided to carry out a fresh assessment because Mr B had submitted another housing application.
13. The Council assessed the housing application in June 2020. Mr B had indicated on his application form that he had a medical need for housing and so the Council asked him to provide evidence to show that his medical conditions were being made worse as a direct result of his accommodation. Mr B did not respond. The Council then wrote to Mr B with its decision on his application. It said that his housing circumstances did not warrant inclusion in any of the bands in its housing allocations scheme and he therefore did not qualify for social housing.
14. Mr B requested a review of its decision. The Council carried out a review but decided to uphold its decision that he did not qualify to join the Council’s housing register.
15. In late 2020, Mr B made a housing application to a Housing Association and he was offered the tenancy of a ground floor flat in early 2021.
16. Mr B considers the Council was wrong to decide that he did not qualify to join the housing register. He says he is disabled and was living in supported accommodation which was unsuitable.

Analysis

17. For the reasons explained in the last section of this statement, I have not investigated the way the Council dealt with Mr B’s housing and homelessness applications in 2019.
18. The housing application considered by the Council in 2020 stated that Mr B was living in a private rented flat. However, Mr B had moved out of the flat soon after he completed the application and did not notify the Council of his change in circumstances.
19. Mr B considers the Council should have known he had moved because it arranged alternative accommodation for him when the police decided it was not safe for him to remain in his accommodation. The Council says this is not the case and there is no evidence in the Council’s records to show that it arranged accommodation for Mr B.
20. While the Council’s homelessness team was aware that Mr B had moved into supported accommodation in December 2019, I do not consider the Council’s registration team was wrong to consider his housing application on the basis of the information contained in his housing application form. Mr B was responsible for informing the Council of his change in circumstances and providing information to show that he had a need for housing.
21. Mr B did not provide any evidence to show that his accommodation was unsuitable and he did not respond to the Council’s request for medical evidence to show that his accommodation was affecting his health. The Council took into consideration the OT’s report which stated that he did not have a substantial level of need. I have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision that Mr B did not qualify to join the housing register.
22. When Mr B requested a review of the Council’s decision, he told the Council that he was in receipt of higher rate mobility personal independence payment (PIP) and higher rate PIP care allowance, and he also said that he was living in supported housing. But he did not tell the Council that he had moved and did not submit any information to show that his current accommodation was unsuitable or that his mobility or medical conditions were affected by his housing. I have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council decided to uphold its decision that Mr B did not qualify to join the Council’s housing register.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I have completed my investigation and do not uphold Mr B’s complaint. There was no fault by the Council.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

24. As explained in paragraph four, we cannot investigate late complaints unless we consider there are good reasons why the complaint was not made to us within 12 months. I have not investigated the way the Council dealt with Mr B’s housing and homelessness applications in 2019 because I consider it would have been reasonable for Mr B to complain to us within 12 months.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman