Summary: Ms D says the Council failed to correctly assess her housing application. We have found fault by the Council including a lengthy period of delay. We uphold the complaint and complete the investigation The Council has agreed to the recommended actions which includes financial redress for the lost opportunity to move to a suitable new home.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Ms D) complained, via a Representative, about the Council’s handling of her housing application and a request for a medical assessment.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

2. I have looked at events from 2020 onwards.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)
5. 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

6. I have considered the information provided by the Representative. I asked the Council questions and examined its response. The council and the complainant were given an opportunity to comment on my draft decisions before I made this final decision.
7. I issued a draft decision in November 2022 which the Council accepted. However because of additional concerns raised by the Representative I decided to pursue the Investigation further and issued a further draft decision in March 2023.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

Background

8. In April 2019 Ms D submitted a housing application to the Council, the form was incomplete. The Council advised her how to submit a Change of Circumstances form to rectify any mistakes.

Events I have investigated

9. In December 2020 Ms D sent the Council medical evidence and evidence that she had four children (adult and juveniles) living with her. She says she completed a Change of Circumstances form, but one is not logged on the Council’s system. Ms D complained to the Council about lack of progress with her application in February 2021. The Council replied three weeks later that it could not locate the form Ms D said she submitted in December 2020.
10. On 11 April Ms D submitted a new application. On 14 July the Council advised Ms D how to submit medical evidence and that it needed verification documents. Ms D sent that data a few days later. On 21 August the Council recorded it had referred the medical application to its Medical Advisor. The Medical Advisor now says it did not receive the request. At the end of October Ms D chased up the Council. This prompted the Council to realise it had incorrectly logged the 2021 application onto the housing waiting list rather than transfer list.
11. On 23 November Ms D again chased the Council and said there were five people in her home and wanted to know the outcome of the medical assessment. Two days later the Council gave the application a new reference as a transfer case and reached a decision. It said Ms D needed two bedrooms because the application was for her and two juveniles. She was placed in Band 4.
12. In April Ms D, via her Representative complained to the Council. In May a Councillor also complained on Ms D’s behalf. The Council did not uphold either complaint and failed to respond to concerns about the medical assessment or household numbers on the application. A second Councillor enquiry was made in October and again the Council did not acknowledge its errors. It said Ms D should submit another Change of Circumstances form.
13. I started my investigation in September. The Council considered Ms D’s medical evidence in October. It also carried out a Housing Review of the case and issued its decision in December. The Council found that Ms D was entitled to Band 2 because of the October assessment which concluded she had severe medical need to move and a medical priority star rating. In addition, the entire household, including two adult children, should have been accepted as part of the application for medical and support grounds. The family were entitled to a four-bedroom home, step free with level access bathing facilities.
14. In January 2023 the Representative contacted the Council accepting the new banding and asking for an Accessible Housing Register code (AHR code). Subsequent communications from the Council incorrectly stated it would log a request for a Review. The Council placed the application on its accessible housing register on 9 January but failed to notify Ms D and her Representative.

What should have happened

15. The Council assess applications made to either join its housing waiting list or to transfer to new housing. In both cases the applicant submits an online form along with supporting evidence. The Council considers the evidence to decide on the applicant’s housing need and place them in a housing band. The bands run from 1 (highest priority) to 4. If the Council requires additional evidence, it should notify the applicant. Any errors in the form or additional evidence can be submitted by the applicant with a Change of Circumstances form. Once assessed and given a band the applicant can bid for advertised properties. If the Applicant does not agree with the banding decision, they can ask for a formal Review by the Council.
16. The Council will also consider medical applications where a person needs rehoused because of a medical condition. A medical assessment form and supporting evidence should be provided to the Council. It will then ask its Medical Advisor to assess the case and complete an assessment form. The Medical Advisor will tell the Council if the applicant should be given ‘reasonable preference’ for rehousing and whether any adaptations might be needed to a home.
17. The Council should give consideration to whether adult children of the applicant can be included as part of the household. While adult children are not, as a matter of course, accepted the Council has discretion to consider the individual circumstances of each application. If there are medical or support grounds for an adult child of an applicant being part of the housing application the Council should look at this and explain its decision. If the applicant disagrees with the decision they can then progress to a Housing Review and have the decision reconsidered by a senior officer.
18. An AHR code is used internally at the Council for applicants assessed as needing an adapted home. It should be applied to the housing application once a decision has been made on medical need and adaptations.

Was there fault by the Council

19. There are numerous failures by the Council in this case. I note the Council has now accepted there was fault.
20. It delayed assessing the 2021 application. This should have been complete in 28 days, instead it was only after contact from Ms D in October that a decision was reached a month later. That was a delay of seven months.
21. In July 2021 the Council advised Ms D to submit evidence. However, she had already sent those documents (possibly without a Change of Circumstances form) in December 2020. The Council accepts that it had an opportunity to assess the medical evidence sooner if it had used the documents supplied at the end of 2020. This means the case could have been referred to the Medical Advisor by June 2021 at the very latest. Instead, it was sent in November and not received by the Medical Advisor. It was only after intervention by the Ombudsman and Representative the Council referred the case back to its Medical Adviser who reached a decision in October 2022 and found the family were in need of adapted housing. That was a delay of at least 16 months.
22. The Council failed to consider the full household as set out by Ms D in her documents supplied in December 2020. The Council says it does not routinely allow adult children onto a parent’s application but accepts that its failure to even consider this meant Ms D was not allowed a right of Review. It completed a Review in December 2022. It found that Ms D’s two adult children should be part of the household. That was a delay of around two years. In addition, it confirmed that Ms D was entitled to bid for a four-bedroom home that was adapted. There was a delay of at least 18 months setting out a full and correct decision on Ms D’s housing application.
23. The Council complaints handling was poor. It had several chances, after receiving complaints from Ms D’s Councillor and Representative, to spot the errors and rectify them. Instead, the Council failed to see the medical assessment had not been processed or that Ms D was asking for her full household to be included on her housing application. The Council also failed to deal with enquiries from the Ombudsman within the required timeframe.
24. The Council also delayed notifying Ms D about the medical application decision in 2022. It failed to send a decision letter and she had to wait for the Review decision to receive details of the assessment outcome.
25. An Officer incorrectly advised the Representative about a Review in January 2023. The Council also failed to notify Ms D when she was placed on the accessible housing register in January.
26. The Representative told me that Ms D’s account was suspended, and she was unable to bid for properties at the end of 2022. I have checked this with the Council and cannot find any evidence of the current account being suspended. In view of this I do not find the Council at fault on this point.
27. The Representative refers to the Council not providing an AHR code. There is fault because the Council should have made it clear it would be placing Ms D on the accessible housing register and also should have confirmed when this action was completed. This would have shown the relevant adaptation level the Council had agreed for Ms D.

Did the fault cause an injustice

28. Because of the fault by the Council Ms D was caused an injustice. She was put to unnecessary time and trouble pursuing her case. She also lost an opportunity to move to a new suitably adapted home.
29. I have examined the properties available which Ms D could have successfully bid for. The records held by the Council show that, had the fault not occurred, Ms D could have successfully bid for an adapted property in August 2021. This means she was left in an unsuitable home without the correct access to bathing facilities for at least 19 months.

Back to top

Agreed action

30. The Council previously accepted the fault identified prior to its Review decision. At that point it agreed with the Ombudsman to pay Ms D £200 for delay and £150 time and trouble. It also accepted it would look at additional financial redress depending on the outcome of the Review and whether Ms D lost an opportunity to move to a new home.
31. In addition to remedy the faults and consequent injustice I have found the council has agreed to within 4 weeks from the date of this decision :
• Pay Ms D £300 for delay and £150 for time and trouble;
• Pay Ms D £4,250 for the 19 months of lost opportunity to move to a new adapted home
• Send a letter of apology and offer to meet with Ms D and Representative to discuss any outstanding concerns.
32. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

33. I have upheld the complaint as I have found fault causing Ms D injustice. The council has accepted my findings and has agreed the actions I have recommended. I have now completed the investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman