Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has not dealt properly with her housing application. The Council did not consider Mrs X’s housing applications properly. Mrs X suffered an avoidable four and a half year delay in being rehoused. The Council says Mrs X will receive a direct offer of a suitable property as soon as possible. The Council should also apologise to Mrs X and pay her £1,000 in respect of her missed opportunity.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complains that the Council has not dealt properly with her housing because
• It wrongly closed her housing application in 2015;
• It says she doesn’t qualify when she submitted a new application despite granting her medical priority in 2015 and her medical circumstances have deteriorated; and
• Its complaint response was late.
2. Mrs X she has lost her entitlement to being rehoused, has to stay in housing that does not meet her needs and she is being discriminated against.

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. 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.
5. 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

6. I spoke to Mr Y about Mrs X’s complaint and considered documents she provided. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its response and the supporting documents it provided.
7. Mrs X 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

The Council’s Allocations Policy

8. Applicants whose applications do not succeed will be offered advice and information on other housing options available. Another application can be made in the event of a change of his/her circumstances or should the availability of housing accommodation alter. (Housing Allocation Scheme March 2016 para 1.5.4)

What happened?

9. This is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain everything I reviewed during my investigation.
10. Mrs X was awarded high priority when she made her housing application in 2015.
11. Mr Y, her son, made a housing application to move to a one bedroomed flat closer to his mum, as her main carer.
12. The Council offered Mr Y two flats which he turned down.
13. The Council closed both Mrs X and Mr Y’s housing applications.
14. Mrs X only found out that her housing application had been closed in March 2021. When they raised this with the Council, they were told Mrs X needed to make a new application. Mrs X later did so and the Council declined to accept it.
15. Mrs X and Mr Y complained to the Council. The Council partially upheld his complaint because it said it should have provided a better explanation of why it closed Mrs X’s housing application.
16. Mrs X and Mr Y were unhappy with the Council’s response and escalated his complaint within the Council’s complaints process. The Council responded further saying it partially upheld her complaint as at stage 1. It said Mrs X's application was closed in line with policy.
17. Mrs X and Mr Y complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

Mrs X’s 2015 housing application

18. The Council says it sent Mrs X a letter advising that her application had been closed. Mrs X and Mr Y say they never received this letter.
19. The Council has provided a copy of a scanned application from 2015 which has a handwritten cover sheet showing it was scanned by Mrs X and stating it was for, “Myself and my son [Mr Y].” Included in this document is a copy of the May 2016 letter advising Mrs X that her application had been closed. On the balance of probabilities, Mrs X and Mr Y did receive the letter.
20. The Council agrees the letter it sent did not contain a proper right of review and did not explain the reason for closing her application. This is fault by the Council. Mrs X was denied the right of review concerning the Council’s decision.
21. During the Ombudsman’s investigation, the Council has provided mutually exclusive accounts of its actions. Having initially accepted that following the closure of Mr Y’s application, Mrs X’s application should have been re-opened with him included on it, it has subsequently said that it believes Mrs X’s application was dealt with in line with the Council’s procedures.
22. I have reviewed the Council’s applications policy in force at the time. There is no requirement for the Council to automatically open another application where one is refused. I agree with the Council that it was not required to re-open Mrs X’s application with Mr Y included on it.
23. However, there is a requirement for the Council to provide advice and information in the event of an unsuccessful application. As identified above in paragraph 21, the Council accepts it did not provide an explanation for closing her application.
24. On the balance of probabilities, if Mrs X and Mr Y had received a full explanation of the reason for the closure of their application, had been offered their right of review and had been provided with advice about their housing options, they would have submitted a new housing application in 2016.
25. On the balance of probabilities, clear advice and information was not provided to Mrs X and/or Mr Y as per paragraph 1.5.4 of the Council’s Allocations Scheme. Mrs X should have been advised she could submit another application with Mr Y included on it.
26. This is fault by the Council. Mrs X lost the opportunity to be considered for different accommodation for a four and a half year period. The Council accepts that if she had had an active housing application, Mrs X would have been rehoused already. Information from the Council shows she could have been rehoused from December 2017.
27. The Council has provided information about the suitability of Mrs X’s accommodation. It says it was suitable for her needs. Having reviewed the Council’s information, I agree that whilst Mrs X’s accommodation did not constitute the housing arrangement that Mrs X and Mr Y wanted in order to facilitate his role as a carer, her housing was suitable.

Mrs X’s 2021 housing application

28. The Council says that when Mrs X re-applied for housing on 2 December 2021, “her application was declined on the basis that if she required 24-care she would first need to be assessed by Adult Social Care. Unfortunately, the officer who registered the application was not aware that she was previously approved for a transfer on medical grounds with her son included on her application as her carer.” This is fault by the Council. Mrs X did not have her new housing application properly considered and continued to lose the opportunity to be considered for different accommodation.

Complaint Handling

29. There was a delay in the Council sending Mrs X and Mr Y a complaint response at stage two of its process. However the Council wrote to Mr Y telling him there would be a short delay. This is not fault by the Council.

Action by the Council

30. The Council has registered Mrs X for a direct offer of a 2-bedroomed wheelchair accessible property and said it will offer her the next suitable property that becomes available. The Council is unable to say how long this will take.

Has Mrs X suffered any additional injustice?

31. I have considered whether any additional remedy is appropriate given the circumstances, in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies.
32. This says, “If the complainant’s current home meets their identified needs for size, location and accessibility, it is unlikely to fit the description ‘unsuitable accommodation’. So the injustice will usually be the complainant’s lost opportunity to improve their housing situation or meet their preferences. This should be assessed in line with our guidelines on distress.”
33. In considering the remedy below I have reflected on the injustice, Mrs X’s age, her circumstances and the continued uncertainty over how long it may take to rehouse her.

Back to top

Agreed action

34. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of this decision:
• Apologise to Mrs X; and
• Pay Mrs X £1,000 in respect of the lost opportunity to improve her housing circumstances since December 2017.

Back to top

Final decision

35. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Mrs X. I have now completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman