Summary: The Council was not at fault for the way it treated Mr X through a housing for Key Worker’s Scheme. The Council was at fault for the way it handled Mr X’s complaint, however this has not caused Mr X significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about the way the Council treated him when he applied for accommodation through its Key Worker’s Scheme. Mr X says the Council:
1. Told him to give notice to his landlord when it was not sure it could offer him a property.
2. Did not offer him a property or a viewing.
3. Advertised a property on 23 June 2020 when it was supposed to be offering properties directly to applicants.
2. Mr X says because of the Council’s actions he had to source alternative accommodation when his notice period ended, and this caused Mr X and his family financial and emotional hardship.

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. As part of this investigation I considered Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I also considered the information provided by Mr X and the Council. I sent a draft of this decision to Mr X and the Council and considered comments received in response.

Back to top

What I found

Reside housing scheme

6. The Council owns a housing company called Reside which enables it to develop and provide housing at affordable rents.
7. Properties rented out through Reside are rented to those in employment and who cannot afford to buy, rent privately and have limited access to social housing. Properties rented through reside are let at between 65% and 80% of the market rate.
8. To be eligible for a Reside property applicants must be in employment and have a household gross income which falls within the income ranges specified by the particular development.
9. Normally applicants bid for properties through their online account however, during the first Covid19 lockdown the Council decided to only make direct offers of properties to applicants.

The Council’s complaints procedure

10. The Council’s complaints process has two stages. At stage one the Council will respond to a complaint within 10 working days.
11. Once a complainant has received a stage one response they may ask for a review if they are still not satisfied. A complainant must ask for a review within 28 days of the stage one response.
12. Within five days the Council will send an acknowledgement and the date by which the complainant should receive a formal reply. This should be within 30 working days. If the Council cannot meet this target it will send the complainant a progress report.

What happened

13. Mr X was an employee of the Council. In March 2019 Mr X joined the Reside scheme.
14. In early April 2020 Mr X contacted the Council as he had not been offered a property. The Council told him two bedroom properties were in high demand, however it would bring up his case at a meeting on 24 April 2020.
15. On 24 April 2020 Mr X spoke with the Council and said he was interested in a viewing a property he had seen. He was signposted to an officer, Officer Y, to deal with this.
16. On 27 April 2020 Mr X telephoned Officer Y who told Mr X he could not have the property he asked to view. This was because Mr X needed to give a longer notice period on his current accommodation. Mr X said Officer Y told him it would be alright for him to give notice to his landlord to end his tenancy as the Council would offer Mr X a two bedroom property which is coming up.
17. Mr X emailed the Council on 27 April 2020 and said he had given notice to his landlord on the advice of Officer Y. He asked the Council for the details of the two bedroom property Officer Y had mentioned.
18. The Council contacted Mr X on 29 April 2020 with details of one property, Property A, which was available to move into and two properties, Properties B and C, which would be becoming available. The Council asked Mr X to let it know if he was interested in any of these. Mr X responded on the same day to say he was interested in Property B as this best suits his notice period. However Mr X said he would not be able to move into the property until mid-June 2020.
19. In early May 2020 the Council emailed Mr X and said it would keep him updated but to keep the Council updated if he can shorten his notice period.
20. Mr X emailed the Council on 4 June 2020 as he had not heard anything since and was concerned he would have to move out of his current accommodation soon. Mr X also said he telephoned Officer Y who denied telling him to give notice to his landlord. The Council responded to Mr X on 5 June 2020 and told him the property which was being listed for Mr X was now not currently unavailable as the current resident had extended their stay for a further month.
21. On 6 June 2020 Mr X’s manager at the Council invited Officer Y and others to a meeting to discuss the situation. This meeting did not take place however Officer Y emailed Mr X’s manager and said Mr X was offered a property which he declined. As a result, the Council let the property to another family. Officer Y said Mr X phoned last week, so he spoke to the team to see what properties were available or coming up. Officer Y said he phoned Mr X back which he did not respond to. Officer Y said it was unwise for Mr X to give notice to his landlord when he had not secured accommodation.
22. On 15 June 2020 Mr X had to leave his accommodation as his notice period ended. He stayed with friends for two days and then moved into another property he found.
23. On 23 June 2020 the Council emailed those on the Reside scheme and said it had two bedroom properties available to rent immediately and asked applicants to log into their account to register their interest.
24. On 17 July 2020 Mr X made a formal complaint to the Council. Mr X said Officer Y told him the Council would offer him a property and told him to give notice to end his tenancy. Mr X said he was not offered this property. Mr X also complained the Council advertised properties on 23 June 2020 despite telling him it was directly allocating properties.
25. The Council provided its stage one response on 17 September 2020. The Council said it offered Mr X a property in April 2020. The Council said Reside must re-let a property within 14 days of it becoming vacant so would never be able to accept Mr X’s notice period. The Council told Mr X he was still eligible to bid on properties and would be notified when a suitable property became available.
26. On 2 November 2020 Mr X contacted the Council as he was not happy with the stage one response. Mr X said he was not offered a property in April 2020. Mr X said he gave notice to his landlord on the advice of Officer Y. Mr X also said Reside advertised properties in his area of choice at the end of June 2020 and did not offer these to him.
27. The Council provided its final complaint response on 6 January 2021. The Council said:
• It offered Mr X a property in April 2020 but Mr X could not have this property as his notice period fell outside of the time Reside needed to re-let the property.
• It offered Mr X Property A in May 2020 which was available to move into, but he declined this in favour of Property B which was due to become available. However Property B was retracted as the current resident extended their stay. The Council told Mr X of this on 5 June 2020.
• During lockdown the Council decided to offer properties to applicants directly as opposed to have applicants bid.
• It could not accept two months’ notice to hold a property for. The Council said it could have better explained this to Mr X and apologised.
• Mr X was still eligible for properties through Reside and should bid.
28. Mr X remained dissatisfied and complained to the Ombudsman. Mr X has now moved out of the Council area and is also no longer employed by the Council.
29. In response to my enquiries the Council said Officer Y had left the employment of the Council, so it could not ask him for his point of view and did not have access to his emails.

Analysis

Complaint a) the Council told Mr X to give notice to his landlord when it was not sure it could offer him a property

30. Mr X’s position is Officer Y told him he could give notice to his landlord to end his tenancy. As a result Mr X gave his landlord notice and believed he would be given a property before his notice period ended. The Council’s position is that Officer Y did not support Mr X giving notice.
31. 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.
32. The only evidence supporting Mr X’s version of events is Mr X’s account of the telephone conversation. I have not seen any other evidence that Officer Y told Mr X to give notice to end his tenancy. In a later telephone conversation with Officer Y, Mr X said Officer Y denied telling him to give his landlord notice to end his tenancy. In addition to this, an email from Officer Y to Mr X’s manager states, “It was unwise for him to give notice to his landlord when he hadn’t secured accommodation.” On the balance of probabilities I think it probable Officer Y did not tell Mr X to end his tenancy, therefore I do not consider the Council was at fault.

Complaint b) The Council did not offer Mr X a property or a viewing.

33. I have not found the Council at fault here. The evidence shows the Council emailed Mr X on 29 April 2020 with the details of a property which was available to move into. The Council attached pictures and told Mr X the monthly rent. In further communication Mr X told the Council he would prefer a different property. Therefore I cannot find the Council at fault for failing to offer Mr X a property.

Complaint c) The Council advertised a property on 23 June 2020 when it was supposed to be offering properties directly to applicants.

34. During the Covid19 lockdown the Council decided to only make direct offers of accommodation to applicants on the Reside scheme. Therefore it was reasonable for Mr X to believe if any properties became available, which he was eligible for, the Council would tell him about these.
35. On 23 June 2020 the Council advertised several properties in areas Mr X was interested in. The email tells applicants to go onto their online accounts and register an interest. Mr X believes the Council should have directly offered him a property.
36. I have not found the Council at fault for advertising these properties. It is up to the Council how it allocates these properties through the Reside scheme. The Council took the decision on 23 June 2020 to start to advertise properties again and allow applicants to bid for these. This was a decision the Council was entitled to make. I accept the Council could have communicated this better to applicants when it started to advertise properties again, however I do not consider this amounts to fault.

Complaint handling

37. The Council was at fault for its handling of Mr X’s complaint. At stage one it took two months to provide its response. The Council’s complaints procedure says it will provide a response at stage one within 10 working days.
38. At the review stage the Council says it will notify a complainant within five working days the date by which the complainant should receive a formal reply. This should be within 30 working days. The Council took 44 working days from when Mr X asked his complaint to be reviewed until he received the review response. This is also fault.
39. In addition the Council did not address Mr X’s allegation that Officer Y told him to give notice to his landlord in its complaints responses. The Council should have done this as it was a key point Mr X raised.
40. I considered the potential injustice to Mr X. I do not think it caused significant injustice because it is unlikely it would have led to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

41. I have completed my investigation and found the Council was not at fault for the way treated Mr X when he applied for accommodation through a Key Worker’s Scheme. It was at fault for the way it handled Mr X’s complaint however, this has not caused him significant injustice so no remedy is recommended.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman