Summary: Ms B complained that the Council delayed in processing her change of circumstances and she may have missed out on the opportunity to be rehoused in a suitable property as a result. We found the Council delayed in processing Ms B’s change of circumstances between July and September 2020. It also failed to provide a proper housing allocations service following a criminal cyber-attack in October 2020. However, Ms B did not miss out on the opportunity to be rehoused as a result. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms B for the distress and uncertainty she suffered because of the delay.

The complaint

1. Ms B complains that the Council delayed in processing her change of circumstances with the result that she may have missed out on opportunities to be rehoused in a suitable property.

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 an organisation’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. I have considered all the information provided by Ms B, made enquiries of the Council and considered its comments and the documents it provided.
5. Ms B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

6. 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))
7. 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))

8. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme which enables housing applicants to bid for available properties which it advertises.
9. The Ombudsman recognises the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. He may not find fault with a council for failing to re-house someone if it has prioritised applicants and allocated properties according to its published lettings scheme policy.

Key facts

10. Ms B is a council tenant. She lives in a two-bedroom property with her partner and three children.
11. On 17 July 2020 Ms B notified the Council of the birth of her twins. At the time she was on the Council’s housing register in the General Band (the lowest band) and was eligible to bid for 3-bedroom properties through the Council’s choice based lettings scheme.
12. Ms B did not receive a response from the Council until 25 September 2020 when it wrote to her acknowledging the information and explaining it could not proceed with her application because it was due for a periodic review. It asked her to complete a housing register application online and provide various documents.
13. Ms B completed the online housing register form on 28 September.
14. On 11 October 2020 the Council’s computer systems were subject to a criminal cyber-attack. As a result, it was unable to access its housing system and could not process any housing register applications, medical assessments or apply any change in circumstances. However, applicants who were already on the bidding system could continue bidding and the Council was still able to allocate properties because it’s choice-based bidding system is run by Newham Council and was unaffected by the cyber-attack.
15. This situation continued until October 2021 when the Council implemented a new housing allocations policy and online application portal. Over the following few weeks and months all housing register applicants had to make a new application and be reassessed under the new policy.
16. Ms B’s application was updated in February 2022. She was placed in band B with a band date of July 2020. A decision letter was sent to her on 25 April 2022.

Analysis

17. I find there was delay in processing Ms B’s change of circumstances between 17 July and 25 September 2020. This was fault. The Council does not have a published timeframe for processing change of circumstance applications and says it took so long to do so because of the COVID-19 pandemic and the demands on the service due to the housing crisis. However, we consider a month to be a sufficient timeframe to process a change of circumstances application.
18. If the Council had considered the information sooner, Ms B’s application would have been placed in the Urgent band and backdated to July 2020 prior to the cyber-attack. She would then have been able to bid on four-bedroom properties.
19. Following the cyber-attack, the Council was unable to update Ms B’s application because it had no access to its IT system.
20. It is the Council’s function to provide a proper housing allocations service, that is one that takes account of people’s current circumstances, not just historic ones, in line with its allocations scheme. The Council failed to provide that service following the cyber-attack until the new allocations policy was implemented in October 2021. Whilst recognising the unique challenges imposed by the cyber-attack, I consider that was service failure. As a result, the Council was unable to update Ms B’s housing application with her change of circumstances. This caused her distress and uncertainty as to when she would be able to bid for suitable properties.
21. Ms B is concerned that she may have missed the opportunity to obtain a suitable property because of the Council’s failure to update details. However, I have seen no evidence to suggest this is the case.
22. The Council says its records show that, under the previous allocations scheme, there were 147 households in the Urgent band with a four-bedroom need and an earlier band registration date than Ms B. The supply of four-bedroom properties is low and only seven such properties were let during 2019/20. Following the changes to the allocations policy in October 2021, there were 250 households in Band B requiring a four-bedroom property and 215 of these had an earlier band date than Ms B.
23. The Council has provided evidence of four-bedroom properties allocated between 20 February 2020 and 14 March 2022. During this period 28 properties were allocated and all the successful applicants had a bid date significantly earlier than Ms B (between 2013 and 2019). One property was allocated to an applicant with a bid date of 16 April 2020 but this allocation was by way of direct offer. So, I am satisfied the delay in updating Ms B’s application has not caused her to miss out on the opportunity to be rehoused in a suitable property.

Back to top

Agreed action

24. The Council has agreed that, within one month, it will send a formal apology to Ms B for the distress and uncertainty caused by the delay in updating her housing application.

Back to top

Final decision

25. I uphold Ms B’s complaint.
26. I have completed my investigation on the basis that the Council has agreed to implement the recommended remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman