Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant being restricted to bidding for two-bedroom properties, and for the time she has been waiting for a property. The Council has followed its housing allocations scheme and given her application the highest priority. The complainant has not been matched with a property in her preferred location because of a shortage of accommodation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Miss X, is in Band One under the Council’s housing allocations scheme. Miss X complains the Council has:
• Refused to allow her to bid for three-bedroom properties
• Failed to match with a two-bedroom property in her preferred location; and
• Incorrectly offered three-bedroom properties to applicants with two-bedroom need in a lower band.
2. Miss X says the Council should give her the next available property whether it has two or three bedrooms. She also wants financial compensation for cost incurred including storage and travel costs to and from school.

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 provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In response to Miss X’s complaint the Council accepted that faults in its bidding system had allowed three-bedroom properties to be allocated to people with two-bedroom need with lower priority than Miss X. It says this happened twice.
7. It recognised this caused uncertainty and distress and because of this paid Miss X £950. The Council confirms it now has a new bidding system which it will review after three months to ensure it is working correctly.
8. Following a section 21 eviction, Miss X and her two children were homeless.
9. The Council’s housing allocations scheme applies the bedroom standard to assess overcrowding. This is in line with what the government recommends.
10. The Council has assessed Miss X’s housing need to be a two-bedroom property. This would provide a bedroom for Miss X, and one bedroom for her two-year-old son and eight-year-old daughter to share.
11. Miss X says her daughter is nearly ten at which age Miss X would be eligible for a three-bedroom property. And another move within a short time will unsettle her children. But its assessment of Miss X’s housing need is in line with its housing allocations scheme. This says children of the opposite sex under ten years can share a bedroom. However, Miss X wants the Council to allow her to bid for a three-bedroom property now.
12. As stated above, the Council accepts it incorrectly allocated two, three-bedroom properties to families with two-bedroom need. I consider payment of £950 to Miss X is a satisfactory remedy for the uncertainty and distress this caused.
13. Miss X says the Council should give her the next available property regardless of the number of bedrooms, because of the time she has been waiting. But the Council has confirmed that there have been ten properties available for Miss X to bid on which were within a 30 minute walk from her daughter’s school and a further ten which were within a 20 minute walk. Therefore, I cannot agree that there have been no available properties which were suitable for Miss X’s identified two-bedroom need.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because we are satisfied the payment of £950 is a suitable remedy to the uncertainty and distress caused to Miss X. There is no fault in the Council’s decision to restrict her to bidding for two-bedroom properties as this is in line with the Council’s housing allocations policy and the Government’s guidance.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman