Summary: Mrs F complained the Council incorrectly advertised a property it offered her and failed to advise her about withdrawal rights in the process. As a result, she accepted the property and said she experienced distress and costs as a result. The Council accepted fault in the advertisement, and it has since offered a remedy. We found its proposals appropriate to remedy the injustice it caused Mrs F. It agreed to offer the proposed remedy to Mrs F.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs F, complained the Council offered her a property which was incorrectly advertised to benefit from off-street parking. She said its officer was rude and failed to explain whether she could decline the property as this was her third offer.
2. As a result, Mrs F said she experienced distress as she accepted the property and has concerns about damage to her car. She also said she will have costs to access electric charging points in public and a potential loss of earnings.

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. As part of my investigation, I have:
• considered Mrs F’s complaint and the Council’s responses;
• discussed the complaint with Mrs F and considered the information she provided;
• considered the information the Council provided in response to my enquiries and its Lettings Policy.
6. Mrs F 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

Council’s Letting’s Policy

7. The Council’s Policy sets out its criteria and procedures for allocating homes to people on the Council’s housing register and the legal context in which the scheme must operate.
8. The Policy says applicants can bid on properties based on the band they have been allocated according to their needs. Applicants, who is highest on the list following the end of the bidding process, will be invited to view a property and will then have 24 hours to accept or refuse the offer.
9. Applicants can refuse an offer of a property and will remain in their housing needs band. However, if applicants unreasonably refuse three or more offers of a property, or have made little attempt to bid for accommodation, they may be moved into a lower priority band or be unable to bid for properties for up to six months.
10. In exceptional circumstances an offer of a property may be withdrawn. The Policy lists examples of when this may apply, which includes where the Council has made an error in the advertising criteria.

What happened

11. Mrs F and her family was on the Council’s housing register. She was regularly bidding for properties which was advertised through the Council’s scheme.
12. Mrs F said she normally only bid for properties with off-street parking available as their car was electric and required a charging point and was needed to be used for work.
13. In autumn 2022 Mrs F bid for a property through the Council’s scheme which was advertised as benefiting from off-street parking. At the end of the bidding process, Mrs F was offered the property and a viewing.
14. Mrs F viewed the property. She realised the property did not have off-street parking and raised her concerns with the Council’s officer.
15. The officer confirmed the advertising of the property was incorrect as it did not have off-street parking. She also told Mrs F the Council would not install such parking, but she could refuse the offer.
16. Mrs F said, as this was the third offer of accommodation she had received, she was afraid to refuse the offer as she may have her priority band reduced or be unable to bid for properties. So, she accepted the property and moved in shortly after.

Mrs F’s complaint

17. Mrs F complained to the Council. She said it had incorrectly advertised the property and its officer had been rude and unapologetic. She explained why she had accepted the property and why she needed off-street parking.
18. Mrs F asked the Council to install off-street parking at the property to enable her to charge and store their car safely.
19. The Council visited Mrs F and told her it would not install a driveway and a dropped kerb necessary for her to get off-street parking. It explained if she wanted off-street parking, she would need to apply for a permission to the Council to do a tenant alteration to the property, and to the County Council for permission for a dropped kerb and to carry out the works.
20. In response to Mrs F’s complaint, the Council said it accepted there was an error in its advertising of the property and apologised for the confusion this had caused. However, it said this had been explained to her at her viewing and she was told she could withdraw her bid, rather than refusing its offer.
21. Mrs F was not satisfied with the Council’s response. She told the Council its officer had not told or advised she could withdraw from the offer.
22. The Council did not change its view in its final complaint response and shared the available public charging points in the area around her property.
23. Mrs F asked the Ombudsman to consider her complaint.
24. In response to my enquiries, the Council said it does not have a recording of the call between Mrs F and its officer, and its officer was absent. It could therefore not confirm whether Mrs F was advised about her right to withdraw from the offer. Due to this, it said it may have been at fault and proposed to:
• make a 50% financial contribution to the installation of a dropped kerb up to a maximum of £1,000, and it would prioritise a tenant alteration request from Mrs F. This would be subject to approval of the works by the County Council; or
• offer a direct let of a like for like property with off-street parking. If Mrs F accepted this, it would make a £500 contribution toward any costs incurred.

Analysis and findings

Advertising of the property

25. The Council agreed it was at fault for incorrectly advertising the property Mrs F moved into as benefitting from off-street parking. This was fault.
26. It also agreed it may have been at fault for failing to advice Mrs F during her viewing of the property regarding her right to withdraw from the offer without impacting her priority band or bidding.
27. I agree with the Council’s amended view following my enquiries. It cannot show it advised Mrs F about her right to withdraw. It may therefore have been at fault for failing to properly advise her of her right to withdraw as set out in its Letting’s Policy.

Officer behaviour

28. I acknowledge Mrs F felt the Council’s officer’s behaviour was rude and apologetic when she communicated with her. However, I cannot make a finding on this matter as there is no available recording of the call or contact for me to consider.

Injustice and Council’s proposal

29. I am satisfied Mrs F experienced an injustice as a result of the Council’s incorrect advertising and the lack of clarity over whether she could withdraw from the offer of accommodation without an impact on her priority band or bidding.
30. I have considered the Council’s offer as set out in paragraph 24 above. I found the Council’s proposal is appropriate to remedy the injustice Mrs F experienced.

Back to top

Agreed action

31. To remedy the injustice the Council caused to Mrs F, the Council should, within one month of the final decision:
• Write Mrs F with its proposed remedy to:
1. make a 50% financial contribution to the installation of a dropped kerb up to a maximum of £1,000, and prioritise a tenant alteration request from Mrs F. This would be subject to approval of the works by the County Council; or
2. offer a direct let of a like for like property with off-street parking and make a £500 contribution toward any costs incurred.
32. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

33. There was fault which caused an injustice. The Council proposed a remedy which was suitable to acknowledge the impact this had on Mrs F. It is on this basis I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman