Summary: Mr D complained how the Council handled his request to join the housing register. He says the Council unfairly refused his application without clearly explaining why and it refused to give him the opportunity to rectify matters. He also says the Council failed to deal with his complaints. We find the Council was at fault for failing to give Mr D detailed reasons why it was rejecting his appeal of its decision to exclude him from the housing register. It also failed to properly deal with his complaints. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

The complaint

1. Mr D complained how the Council handled his request to join the housing register. He says the Council unfairly refused his application without clearly explaining why and it refused to give him the opportunity to rectify matters. He also says the Council failed to deal with his complaints.
2. Mr D says the experience has been stressful. He also says because of the Council’s failures he is living in overcrowded housing.
3. Mr D is supported by a representative, Mr E, in bringing his complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)
6. 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

7. I considered information from Mr D. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered information it sent in response.
8. Mr D, Mr E 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

The Council’s housing allocations policy

9. The Council’s housing allocations policy defines who can apply to join the housing register.
10. Eligible applicants must provide proof of two years of uninterrupted residency in Sandwell at the point of their housing registration date.
11. Applicants who fail to provide information that they would have been reasonably expected to provide (or where the Council obtains information that would affect their housing application) or provide false information may be removed from the housing register for 12 months. Upon expiry of the 12-month exclusion, applicants can re-register.

The Council’s complaints policy

12. When someone raises a complaint the Council will, where possible, attempt to resolve it as soon as it receives it. If that is not possible, it will move to the formal stage one complaints process.
13. The Council aims to respond to complaints at stage one within 10 working days.
14. If the complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage one response, they can ask for it to be reviewed. The complaint will be reviewed by a senior officer who will respond within 20 working days.

What happened

15. This chronology provides an overview of key events in this case and does not detail everything that happened.
16. Mr D applied to join the Council’s housing register in January 2022. He provided information about his address history in his application form. He lives in a privately rented property.
17. Mr D emailed the Council in July and complained about the length of time it was taking to review his housing application. He also said it failed to provide him with updates. The Council contacted Mr D a few days later and accepted him onto its housing register.
18. Mr D contacted the Council a few months later and said he recently had another child. He said he was living in a shared house with his family in one room.
19. The Council agreed to complete an overcrowding assessment to see if it should award any further priority to Mr D’s case.
20. Mr D contacted the Council in November to complain. He said his account was inactive and it was not communicating with him.
21. The Council’s fraud team contacted the housing department. It said there was a case raised by the council tax department surrounding occupancy of the property Mr D was living in. It said information from Mr D’s landlord was contradictory to the information Mr D had provided in his housing application about his address history.
22. The Council contacted Mr D and said for it to process his overcrowding assessment, he needed to provide his full address history. Mr D provided the information the following day.
23. A fraud officer interviewed Mr D and his landlord to find out further information. The officer established Mr D had provided incorrect information about his residency in the area on his housing application. He told Mr D there was a possibility the Council could cancel his housing application.
24. The Council wrote to Mr D in December. It said its panel reviewed the information from the fraud investigation and the recommendation was to exclude him from the housing register for 12 months. It said if he disagreed, he could appeal its decision.
25. Mr D sent in an appeal letter to the Council. He said he had lived in the area for over 15 years, and within that time he worked away but his connections within the area remained. He said he had lived at his current address for two years and five months. Therefore, he met the Council’s residency criteria. He also said he made a genuine mistake with the dates.
26. The Council arranged a review panel to consider Mr D’s case. The panel decided to uphold the original decision and said it was clear Mr D gave false information on his housing application. The Council wrote to Mr D in February 2023 and confirmed its decision.

Back to top

Analysis

27. The Council’s policy is clear that applicants who provide false information may be removed from the housing register for 12 months. Mr D does not dispute he provided the Council with false information about his address history. However, he states he made a genuine mistake.
28. Mr D says the Council failed to give him an opportunity to rectify matters. I do not accept this. It asked Mr D to confirm his address history for the overcrowding assessment. Mr D was given further opportunities to explain himself in his interview with the fraud officer and in his appeal.
29. However, when Mr D sent his appeal, he raised several points he wanted the Council to consider. The Council’s final decision letter does not address any of the points Mr D raised. This is fault. Instead, it states it was clear from the investigation the fraud team carried out he gave false information. The Council has also not provided me with any notes to show how the panel considered the detailed points Mr D raised in his appeal. This fault has caused Mr D a significant injustice as he cannot be satisfied the Council considered his appeal properly.
30. The Council failed to deal with Mr D’s complaints. He raised complaints in July and November 2022. He also made it clear from other telephone calls and correspondence he was unhappy with its service. The Council failed to respond and deal with his concerns through its complaints procedure. This caused Mr D frustration, and he was put to some time and trouble raising his complaint again. There is an internal email from the Council in November 2022 which states it was satisfied there was no complaint because Mr D was in regular contact with officers. However, this was not relayed to Mr D, and this is not in line with the Council’s complaints policy.

Back to top

Agreed action

31. To address the injustice caused by fault by 11 August 2023 the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Mr D.
• Pay Mr D £150 for his frustration and time and trouble.
• Carry out a fresh review of Mr D’s appeal of its decision to exclude him from the housing register. If the Council reverses its decision it should backdate Mr D’s registration date to when it first accepted him onto the housing register.

32. By 11 September 2023 the Council will:

• Issue written reminders to housing staff to ensure they address the points a customer raises when they are dealing with appeals about exclusions from the housing register.

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

Back to top

Final decision

34. There was fault by the Council, which caused Mr D an injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and so I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman