Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly removed him from its housing register and failed to act on his attempts to apply as homeless. We found fault by the Council on both matters. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to remedy the injustice caused to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complained the Council wrongly removed her brother (Mr X) from its housing register and failed to act on his attempts to apply as homeless. Miss Y says the Council’s actions mean Mr X cannot bid for social housing and he has received no help with his homelessness. This has caused Mr X distress and impacted his physical and mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future 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

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have investigated concerns about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s housing situation from March 2022 onwards.
6. I have not investigated concerns about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s case before March 2022. This is because the law says we would expect complaints to be made within 12 months of the complainant becoming aware of a matter. We can exercise discretion to disapply this restriction however I am not aware of grounds to exercise discretion and investigate these matters now.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. As part of my investigation, I have:

• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Miss Y;
• discussed the complaint with Miss Y;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered its response and documents it provided;
• considered our internal guidance on remedies; and
• sent my draft decision to Miss Y and the Council and invited both parties to comment.

Back to top

What I found

8. The prevention duty applies when the council is satisfied that an applicant is threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance. The council has a duty to help the applicant to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
9. The relief duty applies when the council is satisfied that an applicant is homeless (rather than just threatened with homelessness) and eligible for assistance. The council has a duty to take reasonable steps to help the applicant secure accommodation that will be available for at least six months. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B and Homelessness Code of Guidance 13.2)
10. The prevention and relief duties will end when the council has complied with the prevention or relief duty and 56 days have passed (regardless of whether the applicant is still threatened with homelessness in the case of the prevention duty or whether they have secured accommodation in the case of the relief duty). (Housing Act 1996, sections 195 (8)(b) and 189B (7)(b)) and Homelessness Code of Guidance, chapter 14)
11. If homelessness is not successfully relieved, a council will owe the main housing duty to applicants who are eligible, have a priority need for accommodation and are not homeless intentionally. Under the main housing duty, councils must ensure that suitable accommodation is available for the applicant and their household until the duty is brought to an end, usually through the offer of a settled home. (Housing Act 1996, section 193(2))

Housing Allocations

12. 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))
13. Councils must notify applicants in writing of the following decisions and give reasons:

• that the applicant is not eligible for an allocation;
• that the applicant is not a qualifying person;
• a decision not to award the applicant reasonable preference because of their unacceptable behavior.
   

14. The Council must also notify the applicant of the right to request a review of these decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))
15. Housing applicants can ask the council to review a wide range of decisions about their applications, including decisions about their housing priority.
     

Tower Hamlets Borough Council Allocations Scheme

16. This states that applicants to its housing register need to have lived in the borough continuously for three years to join the register. It says that applicants must remain living in the borough to preserve their registration. However, it says that in exceptional circumstances it is acceptable for an applicant to move out of the borough for short period of time and not lose their registration.

What happened

17. Mr X has lived in the Council’s area since childhood.
18. Before 2022 Mr X experienced problems with his housing and previously had help from the Council to secure accommodation.
19. In January 2022 Mr X moved to a shared house within the Council’s area.
20. Following his move Mr X’s health began to worsen and he was diagnosed with Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Crohn’s Disease and Colitis.
21. In April Mr X’s mother contacted the Council about his housing. She explained his health needs meant he needed his own bathroom and so, his accommodation was unsuitable. She said Mr X was trying to find alternative accommodation within the Council’s area. The Council sent Mr X a screening form which he completed and returned by email. The Council sent an acknowledgement confirming receipt of the email.
22. By June Mr X had not found alternative accommodation within the Council’s area and so, desperate to move, he accepted accommodation just outside the Council’s boundaries.
23. In September Mr X left his accommodation outside the borough. He told the Council about his change in circumstances and that he was homeless. He also resent the screening form he completed in April as he had not received a response from the Council. Mr X received an email acknowledging receipt of his resent form.
24. In November the Council wrote to Mr X saying that it had considered his circumstances. It said he had not lived within the Council’s area continuously for the last three years and so he was not eligible to remain on its housing register.
25. Mr X appealed the Council’s decision. He explained he moved out of the Council’s area temporarily because of his health needs. He provided medical information supporting his appeal. His appeal also referred to his homelessness. He received an email acknowledging receipt of his appeal.
26. In January 2023 Mr X chased up a response to his appeal. The Council said it did not receive his appeal. Mr X resent his appeal.
27. In March Mr X made a complaint about the Council’s handing of his case including his attempts to make a homelessness application.
28. In April the Council refused Mr X’s appeal. It said applicants must be living within its area for three years continuously to join its housing and so Mr X was not eligible to join. Its response did not refer to the medical information provided by him.
29. The response also referred to Mr X’s raising concerns about his homelessness but said he needed to raise these matters separately and with the relevant officers.
30. Mr X sought to challenge the result of his appeal but was told that only one appeal is allowed.
31. Mr X remained unhappy with the Council’s handling of this case and approached the Ombudsman. In his complaint he said the Council:

• made the wrong decision when it said he cannot join its housing register and did not consider his medical information and circumstances;
• did not act on his attempts to make a homelessness application; and
• has not allocated him a housing caseworker to help with his housing.

32. In response to our enquiries on this complaint the Council said:

• its decision that Mr X cannot join its housing register is in keeping with its allocations policy and there are no exceptional reasons why he can join the register.
• no information has been received to suggest that Mr X was at threat of homelessness.
• Mr X is not living within its area and is not homeless and so it would not allocate him a housing caseworker.

Finding

Mr X’s removal from the Council’s housing register

33. The Council’s response to Mr X’s appeal said that applicants applying to join its housing register must be living within the borough for three years continuously. However, the Council’s allocations policy says that in exceptional circumstances an applicant can move outside the borough for a short time and not lose their registration.
34. Mr X’s appeal explained his health problems had forced him to move out of the borough. It also confirmed that he only lived outside of the borough for a few months. I have seen no written evidence showing the Council considered Mr X’s circumstances and the supporting medical information he provided.
35. For the above reasons I consider the Council has not properly considered Mr X’s appeal against its decision to remove him from its housing register. This has caused Mr X uncertainty and potentially prevented him from being on the Council’s housing register.
36. I also note the Council did not deal with Mr X’s appeal promptly and he had to chase a response and resubmit it. Mr X has provided copies of the acknowledgements he received from the Council and so I am satisfied the Council received the appeal and should have acted on it.

Failure to deal with Mr X’s attempts to make a homelessness application

37. Mr X told the Council that he was homeless after leaving his accommodation outside the brough. He also stated he was homeless as part of his appeal against the Council’s decision to remove him from the Council’s housing register.
38. For the above reason I am satisfied the Council had reason to believe that Mr X may be homeless. It should have invited an application from him in response. It is fault that it did not do so.
39. I note the Council says it did not receive some communications from Mr X. However automated acknowledgements were sent to him and so I consider these communications were received and should have been acted on.

Failure to provide Mr X a caseworker

40. The Council will only provide applicants with a caseworker in certain circumstances such if an applicant is homeless. Because of the fault identified it is unclear if Mr X should have been assigned a caseworker to help with his housing.

Back to top

Agreed action

41. To remedy the injustice set out above, the Council has agreed to carry out the following actions.
42. Within eight weeks of my final decision the Council will

• reconsider its decision to remove Mr X from its housing register. When doing so it will have regard to its allocations policy and the medical information Mr X has provided supporting his reasons for temporarily living outside the borough. If the reconsideration finds Mr X should remain on the housing register the Council should backdate his priority banding and consider if he might have missed an offer of accommodation while he was removed from the register;
• invite Mr X to submit a homelessness application and assign a housing officer to help him do so;
• send Mr X a written apology for the fault identified; and
• pay Mr X £200 in recognition of the uncertainty caused to him and the avoidable time and trouble caused to him in pursuing his appeal.

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

Back to top

Final decision

44. I found fault with the Council which caused Mr X an injustice. The Council has agreed with my recommendations to remedy this, and I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman