Summary: The Council delayed updating Miss B’s housing application, but it did not cause Miss B any significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Miss B complains that the Council delayed adding her preferred areas to her housing account which meant she was unable to bid on properties in those areas. Miss B also complains that the Council is not allocating properties in accordance with its Housing Allocations Policy.
2. Miss B says that as a result of the Council’s failings, she has lost the opportunity to bid on properties and move to an area where she can receive the care and support she needs.

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 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

5. 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

6. Miss B joined the Council’s housing register in May 2020. She was awarded Band 2 because she needs care and support.
7. Miss B contacted her Member of Parliament (MP) in November 2021 because she was concerned about how long it was taking to be offered a property. The MP then wrote to the Council on Miss B’s behalf.
8. In the Council’s response, it said that it could not give a concrete timeframe on how long she would have to wait for a property. It advised Miss B to consider expanding her chosen areas as she had only selected three areas of the city, meaning she had ruled out 37 areas.
9. Miss B says that she asked to expand her preferred areas in late December 2021. Then, on 10 February 2022, she complained via her MP that she had been waiting six weeks for the Council to add the additional areas to her account.
10. A few days later, the Council advised Miss B’s MP that her areas of preference had been updated.
11. Miss B’s MP then contacted the Council again on 1 March. She said that Miss B was still unable to bid on properties in the new areas she had chosen.
12. The Council investigated and responded on 3 March. It said that Miss B had submitted a change of circumstances form on 9 February and she was unable to bid on the new areas while it was awaiting assessment. It confirmed that the assessment had since been completed.
13. Miss B has been able to bid on properties in the additional areas she selected since 3 March.
14. Miss B says information on the Council’s website shows that properties have been offered to applicants with less housing priority than she has. She is concerned that the Council is not allocating properties fairly.
15. Miss B would like the Council to provide further information about the length of time she will likely be waiting for a property.

Analysis

16. The Council gave Miss B incorrect information when it said that she had only selected three areas and that she would not be able to bid on properties which she had not selected as preferred areas. The Council has confirmed that increasing or decreasing ‘Your Preferred Areas’ has no effect on which properties the applicant sees advertised and is able to bid on. However, any selection on ‘Areas You Cannot Live’ does affect which properties an applicant sees advertised.
17. When Miss B first applied for housing, she selected three of the ten areas in the section ‘Areas You Cannot Live’ and so would not have seen any properties advertised in those three areas.
18. When Miss B amended her application, she selected one of the ten areas in the section ‘Areas You Cannot Live’. And so, once the Council updated her application, she was able to see properties being advertised in two additional areas.
19. The Council says that Miss B did not ask to amend the areas on her application until 9 February 2022. On the balance of probabilities, I consider it likely that Miss B first tried to change her areas in late December 2021, before submitting a change of circumstances form on 9 February. In reaching this view I have taken into account Miss B’s complaints about the delay, the Council’s responses, and the Council’s case notes. I consider it took the Council around nine weeks to update Miss B’s application. I do not consider it should take more than four weeks to update an applicant’s chosen areas. The Council’s delay here was fault.
20. However, I do not consider this delay caused Miss B any significant injustice. This is because it is unlikely that the delay caused Miss B to miss out on any properties. I note that despite Miss B being able to bid on properties in nine of the ten areas since March 2022, she has not been in the top bidding position for any of the properties she has bid on. It follows that if she had been able to bid on properties in these areas while she was waiting for her application to be updated, she is unlikely to have been successful.
21. The Council’s website provides information about the properties it has let and the housing priority of the successful applicants. Miss B has highlighted four properties which were offered to applicants with less housing priority than she has. The Council has confirmed that three of the properties had been adapted. Miss B would have been able to bid on these properties, but if she had done so she would have been lower in the shortlist than any applicants who required an adapted property. Miss B was able to bid on the property which had not been adapted and she would have been offered it if she had bid on it, but she did not. I have found no evidence of fault by the Council here.
22. The Council’s website provides a waiting time calculator which lets applicants check the supply and demand for properties in each area along with the average waiting time according to housing priority and bedroom need. I do not consider it is fault for the Council not to provide any more detailed information about the length of time Miss B is likely to be waiting for accommodation.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I have completed my investigation and uphold Miss B’s complaint. There was fault by the Council, but it did not cause Miss B any significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman