Summary: We found fault on Ms J’s complaint made on behalf of Mr K about the Council failing to properly consider his homeless application. It failed to advise him about making an application to join the housing register. Nor did it make reasonable adjustments when made aware he could not read or write. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Ms J, a solicitor, complains on behalf of Mr K about the Council failing to properly inform him of, or consider and decide, applications for:
1. the tenancy to be placed in his sole name when his wife left and ended the joint tenancy of the flat they rented from it;
2. a new tenancy for a smaller property;
3. a discretionary tenancy of the property at the end of the joint tenancy; and
4. joining the housing register when he also made a homeless application in May 2021 during which it failed to make adjustments for his inability to read and write.
2. As a result, he lost the opportunity to be rehoused earlier than he was, remained in a property too large for him which he could not afford to rent, heat, or furnish, and built-up rent arrears.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

3. I have not investigated the following complaints:

• Complaint a)-c): This is because they are outside of our jurisdiction as these are about its actions relating to the management of the Council’s social housing in the capacity as registered provider. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
• For the sake of completeness, this would also mean we could not investigate any complaint he may have about repairs to his current property.
• Nor can we investigate any complaint about a decision which carried the right of appeal.

4. We usually do not investigate late complaints. These are complaints when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. Ms J complained to us in December 2022. This means we would usually only investigate the Council’s actions back to December 2021. Due to Mr K’s communication difficulties, I exercised discretion to investigate its actions for a further six months to June 2021. This was when the Council became aware he could neither read nor write. Events before June 2021 have not been investigated.
5. References to events before this date are made only to put later events into context.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
7. 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)
8. 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)

Back to top

Council housing allocation policy

9. Its policy explains which groups of people get priority for an allocation of public rented housing. Applicants are given a priority banding from A+ (the highest, which includes emergencies, for example) to C- (the lowest, which includes where the full homeless duty was not accepted, for example). Priority within bands is by date order according to when they were placed in that band.
10. The housing department will offer help to complete the application form if an applicant is unable to use a computer and has no friend, relative, or advocate helping them.
11. Staff in housing needs service can help and encourage applicants with support needs and those with language difficulties to use the website to choose and bid for properties. It keeps an assisted bidding list for those who tell it they are unable to engage with the system themselves.

Back to top

Equality Act 2010

12. The Equality Act 2010 says an individual or organisation that provides a service to the public, such as councils, must not treat someone worse just because of one or more “protected characteristics”. Protected characteristics include people with disabilities including learning difficulties.
13. The law says an organisation must not do something to someone in a way that has a worse impact on them and other people who share a particular protected characteristic than it has on people who do not share that characteristic.
14. Service providers must not treat disabled people unfavourably because of something connected to their disability where they cannot show what they are doing is objectively justified.
15. To make sure that a disabled person can use the service as far as is reasonable to the same standard as a non-disabled person the service provider must make reasonable adjustments.
16. A service provider is not allowed to wait until a disabled person wants to use its services but, must think in advance about what people with a range of impairments might reasonably need. They should consider the needs of people who have a visual impairment, a hearing impairment, a mobility impairment, a learning disability, for example.
17. If a person believes they have been discriminated against as a result of the actions of a service provider, they may make a claim for damages in the county court, although government guidance says:

“Defending or taking a claim in court can be lengthy, expensive, and draining. It can also have a damaging impact on the reputation of an organisation. It is likely to be in everyone’s interest to try to put things right before a claim is made to a court”.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

18. I considered all the information Ms J sent, as well as the Council’s response to my enquiries. I sent a copy of my draft decision to Ms J and the Council.

Back to top

What I found

19. Mr K has a number of health conditions and cannot read or write. He was a joint tenant of a Council property with his wife. She left him and he applied to transfer the property into his sole name which the Council refused to do. The Council served him with a Notice to Quit. This is a document a landlord or owner gives a tenant which tells them they need to leave the premises they rent.
20. In early 2021, he made a homeless application to the Council. Ms J complains the Council failed to make any reasonable adjustments to help Mr K with this application or with an application to join its housing register. This meant he could not access or complete his Personal Housing Plan (PEP). Nor did it address this failure when he complained.
21. Ms J also complains it failed to explain why it took so long to assess his housing register application.
22. The Council confirmed it was told Mr K could neither read nor write in June 2021 and that initially, it made no reasonable adjustments in the way it dealt with him.

Homeless application

23. At the end of April 2021, the Council received a referral for Mr K from another council about homelessness as he had no local connection with it. The other council decided he was eligible for help and homeless. When it received the referral, the Council did a telephone assessment with Mr K.
24. In June, an officer sent him an email asking for documents and for him to sign a consent form.
25. In July, it sent him an email with its decision on his homeless application and asked him for more information. It decided he was not homeless as he occupied a property and there was no legal action started to recover it from him. Mr K’s previous solicitor asked for a review of the decision. The Council confirmed this did not take place because it was at the peak of recruitment issues at the time with a high turnover of staff. The Council issued a Notice to Quit on Mr K.
26. In November, Mr K told the Council he needed a new solicitor. He also told the Council he could not read or write. The Council quashed the previous decision as a Notice to Quit had now been issued. It suggested he register with Homefinder. Homefinder helps people find social housing outside their area. It is a national housing mobility scheme. The officer helped him complete the application and recorded Mr K could not read or write. The officer also recorded Mr K saying he wanted to move out of borough. Mr K instructed Ms J as his new solicitor.
27. Later that month, the Council emailed Mr K, accepting it owed him a relief duty and ‘published’ a PHP to him which it updated in December. While there was some email and telephone contact between the Council and Ms J, the evidence showed it emailed Mr K directly on several occasions.
28. Ms J said it was only in January 2022 the Council registered him as homeless.

My findings

29. In finding fault on this complaint, I took the following into account:
1. The Council accepts it was aware in June 2021 that Mr K could neither read nor write. Despite this, the records show the Council emailed Mr K directly. I am satisfied there is no evidence it made reasonable arrangements to deal with his needs at this point in time. This is fault.
2. The same month, the Council confirmed it emailed him directly with a request for documents. While he was represented by his previous solicitor at this time, I have seen nothing to show it also emailed the solicitor. It failed to show it made reasonable adjustments to meet Mr K’s needs. This is fault.
3. In July, the Council issued a ‘not homeless’ decision. There is no information about how this was communicated to Mr K and whether it did so in a way he could access and understand it. While this is fault, I am not satisfied this caused Mr K an outstanding injustice. This is because the same month, Mr K’s solicitor asked for a review of the homeless decision.
4. I am satisfied the Council failed to carry out the review until November when it quashed the decision after noting a Notice to Quit was issued in July, four months earlier. This is fault.
5. I am also satisfied the failure to promptly carry out a review caused Mr K avoidable injustice. This is because:

1. he lost the opportunity to have the review done sooner;
2. as the reason for quashing the decision was the issuing of the Notice to Quit, he lost the opportunity of this being done sooner, possibly in July;
3. this means the Council could have decided it owed him a relief duty sooner as well;
4. it also means it could have registered him as homeless earlier rather than January 2022; and
5. he has the uncertainty of not knowing whether he may have been rehoused earlier than February but for the fault.
6. The Council ‘published’ the PHP in November but does not say how this was communicated to him. It was only at the end of the month that Mr K had a new solicitor representing him. Again, there is no evidence of the Council making reasonable adjustments to ensure the PHP was accessible to him in a way he could understand. This is fault.
7. I am satisfied any injustice to Mr K was not significant because he had Ms J to explain it to him when instructed.
8. The following month, the Council updated the PHP and ‘published’ it. Again, it failed to show how this was communicated to him considering he could not read or write. There is no evidence the Council took steps to go through the PHP with Mr K. These failures are fault.
9. Again, the avoidable injustice to Mr J is not significant as he had his solicitor who could explain it to him.

Housing register application

30. Ms J complains despite Mr K making a homeless application in early April/May 2021, the Council failed to advise him about applying to join its housing register. The Council confirmed it had no evidence of advising Mr K about applying to join its register at the time it received his homelessness referral. It explained this was at the peak of its recruitment problems.
31. In November, he told the Council he wanted to move out of borough but had been refused by another local authority. The Council emailed Mr K as they had no online application for him. It asked him to complete a financial statement and authority form.
32. Mr K applied to join the housing register in December 2021 with help from Ms J.
33. Ms J says it was only in January 2022 the Council registered him as homeless on its system. He was given Band C status on the housing register with the date of 4 May 2021 as the date it placed him in this band. This was because he was homeless and at the ‘relief’ stage of the process. This date was used as it was the first day the Council received the homeless referral from the other council, and it was effective.
34. The Council housed him in February, two months after applying to join the register. The Council explained Mr K, or someone on his behalf, placed a bid for a property. While he was not top of the list for it, because of refusals and rejected applicants, it was offered to him.
35. Ms J noted Mr K remained in the former matrimonial home during this period which he struggled to afford.

My findings

36. I make the following findings on this complaint:
1. I am satisfied the Council failed to advise Mr K about applying to join the housing register when he presented himself as homeless. On balance, it is likely he would have qualified to join the housing register. The failure to advise him is fault.
2. I am also satisfied the fault caused Mr K injustice. This is because the Council did not advise or help him to apply to join the register until December, seven months after he presented himself as homeless. When considering his injustice, I took account of the likely time of 4-6 weeks it would have taken to process an application. In doing so, I consider the total delay is about 6.5 months, as he was, I understand, put on the register in January 2022. What this means is Mr K lost the opportunity to bid for properties during this period. I also took account of Mr K remaining in the former matrimonial home during this period.

Complaint procedure

37. In June 2022, Ms J complained to the Council. This included a complaint about the way it dealt with his application for housing which included many issues which I am not investigating. The two issues complained about which are within our jurisdiction included: him failing to access his PHP as he cannot read of write; taking too long to assess his housing register application.
38. I have seen an undated stage 1 response to Ms J’s complaint. This could not respond to 3 of the points she complained about, but none are issues I can investigate. The response failed to address the two issues raised in her complaint. The letter signposted her to the second stage of its complaints procedure if dissatisfied with its response.
39. I have not seen Ms J’s request for it to go to the second stage but, I have seen the Council’s response sent to her at the end of August. This contained a reference to her complaint about it taking too long to assess his housing register application. It failed to address this complaint and instead referred to Mr K applying for accommodation as someone homeless. There was nothing in the response about the complaint made concerning it failing to take account of his inability to read or write when it sent him the PHP.

My findings

40. I found fault on this complaint for the following reasons:
1. Its stage 1 response failed to address the two issues she raised in the complaint. These were about failing to enable him to access his PHP as he cannot read or write and it taking too long to assess his housing register application.
2. Its stage 2 response also failed to address these two issues.
3. I am satisfied these failures caused Mr K an injustice. This is because it caused him distress as he had the frustration of not having his complaints properly addressed.

Back to top

Agreed action

41. I considered our guidance on remedies.
42. The Council agreed to carry out the following within four weeks of the final decision on this complaint:
1. Send Mr K a written apology through Ms J for failing to: provide evidence of it recording the need to make reasonable adjustments for its communication with him; make reasonable adjustments when communicating with him; carry out the review of its homeless decision when requested; advise and help him earlier to apply to join its housing register; address the concerns raised in his complaint under its complaints procedure.
2. Pay £750 to Mr K for the injustice caused.
3. Review why no reasonable adjustments were recorded for his file or made for Mr K in the Council’s communications.
4. Make sure it is recorded in its systems that he needs reasonable adjustments and what these are.
5. Ensure all review requests are promptly actioned when received on future cases.
6. Remind all relevant staff of the need to advise those making homeless applications about also making an application to join the housing register.
7. Remind staff dealing with complaints of the need to address concerns and issues raised within that complaint when responding.
43. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

44. I found fault on the complaint sent by Ms J on Mr K’s behalf against the Council. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman