Summary: The complainant (Mrs X) said the Council failed to consider the review request for her housing register application. She also complained about the way the Council handled her complaint. We found fault with the way the Council dealt with Mrs X’s complaint. This fault caused her injustice. We also found fault in the way the Council carried out a review of Mrs X’s housing register application but this fault did not cause her injustice. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X, make a payment to recognise her distress and time and trouble spent on complaining and carry out some service improvements.

The complaint

1. Mrs X says the Council failed to consider her request to review her priority banding on the housing register. She also complains about the Council’s failings when dealing with her complaint.
2. Mrs X says the Council’s failings had a negative impact on her children’s mental health and education. They also, she says, affected her own mental health and wellbeing.

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. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
6. 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/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
7. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
8. 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

What I have and have not investigated

9. We would normally not investigate anything that happened more than 12 months before a complainant came to us. Although Mrs X brought her complaint to us in September 2022, I decided to look at the events from December 2020. This is because Mrs X complained to the Council in June 2021 and for many months waited for the Council’s response. When contacting us Mrs X still had no response from the Council. I decided there are good reasons for extending my investigation to December 2020 as the Council’s delays with the complaint handling should not disadvantage Mrs X.
10. I did not investigate Mrs X’s second request for a review of her housing register priority banding which she filed at the end of September 2022. Her complaint to the Council and to us was about the Council’s first review of the priority banding. If Mrs X is unhappy about the second review, she should raise it with the Council first.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I talked to Mrs X and considered the information she provided.
12. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information and documents it provided.
13. I reviewed the Council’s Allocation Policy of 2019 (the Policy) and the information on the Council’s website on how the Council deals with corporate complaints.
14. 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

Legal and administrative background

Housing register applications

15. 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))
16. 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))
17. Housing applicants can ask the council to review a wide range of decisions about their applications, including decisions about their housing priority. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))
18. Statutory guidance on the allocation of accommodation says:
• review procedures should be clear and fair with timescales for each stage of the process;
• there should be a timescale for requesting a review - 21 days is suggested as reasonable;
• the review should be carried out by an officer senior to the original decision maker, or by a panel not including the original decision maker;
• reviews should normally be completed within a set deadline - 8 weeks is suggested as reasonable.

The Council’s housing allocation policy

19. The Council will assess each application for housing and place it in the appropriate Housing Needs Band based on the individual circumstances of each case. After completing the housing application assessment, the Council will send an applicant a letter setting out the outcome. This letter will include:
• The Housing Needs Band;
• The size of property the applicant is eligible for;
• The applicant’s effective date;
• Details of the appeal and review procedures;
20. Applicants who disagree with a decision that the Council has made must request a review in writing within 21 days of the date of the letter that informed them of that decision. The Council is required to respond to it within 56 days.
21. If an applicant is dissatisfied with any aspect of the way in which their application is dealt with, other than one for which a review can be requested, they can raise a complaint with the Council.

The Council’s complaint procedure

22. The Council’s corporate complaint procedure consists of two stages:
• Stage one – the Council will acknowledge complaint within five working days and will aim to provide its response within 20 working days;
• Stage two – if unhappy with the outcome of the Council’s investigation, within 20 working days the complainant can ask the Council to escalate their complaint, setting out their reasons for dissatisfaction. The Council’s response either will confirm a final decision at stage one or will start a further investigation. If the complainant remains unhappy at the end of this process, they can contact the Ombudsman.

What happened

Housing Register application

23. The Council received Mrs X’s application to the Housing Register in the second week of March 2020. After receiving some documents from Mrs X, in October the Council asked Mrs X to provide further information and documents necessary to complete the process. The Council’s allocation officer (Allocations Officer 1) confirmed she would register Mrs X’s application from March 2020.
24. In December the Council accepted Mrs X’s application to the Housing Register placing her in the priority band C.

Review request

25. Mrs X was not happy about the priority band given to her application. The Council’s allocations officer (Allocations Officer 2) responded to Mrs X’s correspondence in March 2021, telling her Allocations Officer 1 was away from work on long-term leave. Allocations Officer 2 explained when deciding on Mrs X’s application in December 2020, the Council had already considered the evidence of the alleged harassment from her neighbours. Allocations Officer 2 asked Mrs X to provide further information and to send an updated income and expense form as well as her bank statements within two weeks. Allocation Officer 2 attached the priority banding criteria to this correspondence.
26. After receiving Mrs X’s complaint at the end of June, Allocations Officer 2 said the Council was reviewing its priority banding decision of December 2020 but could not progress the review as Mrs X failed to send extra documents asked for in April. Within the next two weeks Mrs X provided the Council with:
• A letter from a housing officer;
• Support letters from her children’s schools and her General Practitioner (GP);
• Identification documents.
27. Allocation Officer 2 liaised with the Community Support Officer and received details of the reports from Mrs X and her neighbours.
28. In the second week of July the Council decided Mrs X’s Housing Register application should remain in the priority band C. The Council provided its reasons and referred to the evidence sent by Mrs X. The Council also confirmed when deciding on Mrs X’s priority banding it used the information received from the Community Support Officer and the environmental health department. The Council told Mrs X she could ask for a review of the decision within 21 days.
29. In December Mrs X had a telephone conversation with Allocations Officer 1 during which she discussed her housing circumstances. Mrs X understood she might be placed in the priority banding B. After sending some further letters from the professionals involved in supporting the family, at the end of September 2022 Mrs X again asked the Council to change her housing register priority banding.

Complaint

30. At the end of June 2021 Mrs X complained about the way the Council dealt with her Housing Register application, including the priority banding given to her application. Mrs X received an automated acknowledgement confirming the Council received her complaint and would respond within 20 working days.
31. At the end of July 2021 and in September 2022 Mrs X contacted the Council again asking for a response to her complaint. After the second reminder the Council asked for Mrs X’s application reference number and her full address and apologised for the delay in responding to her complaint. The Council said it would respond to Mrs X’s complaint by mid-October.
32. Mrs X brought her complaint to us at the end of September. She explained she could not attach the Council’s responses as the Council failed to respond to her complaint.
33. At the end of October the Council said it would provide its stage one response at the beginning of November. Because of the lack of progress we contacted the Council at the beginning of December. The Council suggested it would send its response in the third week of December.
34. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint in the second week of February 2023, not upholding her complaint.
35. Mrs X was not satisfied the Council considered all the evidence filed by her, especially all the records of anti-social behaviour and racist attacks. She asked the Council to take her complaint to the next stage.
36. Three weeks later the Council completed stage two of the complaint process. After reviewing the housing allocation notes and supporting documentation and following the consultation with the Community Support Officer, the Council decided there were no grounds for changing its original decision on Mrs X’s Housing Register application for the following reasons:
• Mrs X did not present any new substantive medical evidence for her or for her children;
• The Community Support Officer did not record any new incidents since June 2022.

Analysis

Housing register application review

37. During my investigation I found the review of Mrs X’s Housing Register application was not carried out by an officer more senior than the one who originally accepted Mrs X’s application. As explained under paragraph 18 of this decision the review should be carried out by an officer senior to the original decision maker, or by a panel not including the original decision maker. This did not happen for Mrs X’s review which is fault. I do not, however, consider this fault caused Mrs X injustice, as the result of the review, on the balance of probabilities, is likely to have been the same if a senior officer carried it out. This is because we have evidence the decision was made properly. The Council considered extra evidence sent by Mrs X and gave its reasons for not considering Mrs X’s Housing Register priority banding should change.
38. I also found the Council failed to complete the review of Mrs X’s priority banding within the prescribed timescales. This, however, was caused by the difficulties in getting updated documents, which the Council asked for in the spring of 2021. Mrs X filed them at the end of June and at the beginning of July.
39. During my telephone conversation with Mrs X she told me she did not understand why the Council kept asking her to send the same documents. After checking the correspondence between Mrs X and the Council I found the Council’s requests for the new documents were legitimate. Most of the documents sought by the Council were necessary to check whether there had been any changes in Mrs X’s circumstances.
40. As the Council could not make a decision on Mrs X’s review request within the prescribed timescales for reasons outside its control, I found no fault in this part of the process.

Complaint process

41. The main issue of Mrs X’s complaint raised in June 2021 was the priority banding for her Housing Register application. This issue, however, was considered by the Council as part of the review and under the Policy should not be part of the corporate complaint.
42. Mrs X also mentioned in her complaint she was unhappy about the way the Council considered her request for a review. She pointed to the unsatisfactory communication and repeated requests for the documents. These procedural aspects should have been considered in line with the Council’s approach to the corporate complaints.
43. I found fault with the Council’s complaint handling as it:
• Significantly delayed providing Mrs X with its stage one response. The Council failed to respond by the end of July 2021. Mrs X received the Council’s response in the second week of February 2023, which meant a delay of over 18 months. In the response to my enquiries the Council said the delays were caused by the high volume of contact and strain on its resources across service areas that had been experienced during the recent pandemic. However sympathetic we might be to the difficulties councils experienced during the pandemic, the reasons given by the Council cannot justify the delay of 18 months in complaint handling. This delay caused Mrs X frustration and uncertainty.
• Failed to focus on the procedural aspects of Mrs X’s review request, examining instead once again the issue of Mrs X’s priority banding. The Policy quoted in paragraph 21 of this decision excludes from the complaint process matters which can be challenged through a review. The Council’s disregard for this distinction caused injustice to Mrs X as she was confused by the process and distressed.

Back to top

Agreed action

44. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, we recommend the Council within four weeks of my final decision complete the following:
• Send a written apology to Mrs X;
• Pay Mrs X £150 to recognise the distress caused by the Council’s failings and extra time and trouble necessary to pursue her complaint.
45. We also recommend the Council within three months of the final decision:
• Ensure review requests for Housing Register applications are considered by an officer senior to the original decision maker, or by a panel not including the original decision maker;
• Provide training to the staff dealing with Housing Register applications and review requests on the distinction between matters considered as part of reviews and matters which should be taken through the Council’s corporate complaints process;
• Prepare a plan of action for dealing with the overdue corporate complaints;

The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

46. I uphold part of this complaint. I found fault with the way the Council handled Mrs X’s complaint, which caused her injustice. I also found fault with the way the Council carried out a review of Mrs X’s Housing Register application but this fault did not cause injustice to Mrs X. The Council has accepted my recommendations so this investigation is at an end.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman