Summary: We found no fault on Miss K’s complaint about it failing to update her housing application in 2022 following the birth of her son. The Council responded to her queries about how to update her account, explained what she had to do, and gave her a contact number to call if she had difficulties doing so.

The complaint

1. Miss K complains the Council failed to update her housing application in 2022 and only did so 19 months later in response to her complaint: as a result, she lost the opportunity to bid for larger accommodation with a higher banding priority.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.

Back to top

Council Housing Allocations Scheme (10 April 2017)

5. The Council had a choice-based lettings scheme (scheme1). Along with its Housing Association partners, it agreed to offer all available homes to those registered on the scheme.
6. Eligible applicants applied to join the housing list (housing register). Applications were assessed according to the information and evidence needed and placed in a Priority Band. The application date was the date it received the application.
7. The scheme had three Priority Bands with Band 1 as the highest priority and Band 3 as the lowest:

• Band 1: included those with Emergency Priority such as those who cannot leave an NHS hospital because they have no suitable accommodation and as a result of a medical condition, need a specially adapted home, for example.
• Band 2: included those with a High Medical Priority where there was an urgent need to move for rehousing because they would otherwise suffer from a serious physical or mental illness because of their present home.
• Band 3: included those with a need to move because they, or household member, would otherwise suffer a significant deterioration in their physical or mental illness because of their housing as decided by the Council’s Medical Advisor.

8. It was the applicant’s responsibility to keep their housing application up to date if circumstances changed.
9. If an applicant’s case gave rise to medical issues, the applicant needed to complete an online medical form. The Medical Advisor would consider the evidence and may recommend Emergency Priority, High Priority, or Priority on Medical Grounds. Recommendations about the type of property needed could be made, such as the need for an extra bedroom, for example.
10. An applicant would only bid for accommodation of the right size for the household’s needs. It calculated how many bedrooms an applicant needed as follows:

• 1 bedroom or studio for applicant and partner;
• 1 bedroom for every two children of the same sex, under the age of 21;
• 1 bedroom for a child of the opposite sex to another child, if the child was aged over 10; and
• 1 bedroom for any other person over 21.

11. Three-bedroom properties were offered to a couple or lone parent with two children not of the same sex where one was over 10 years old, or with three children.
12. Four-bedroom properties were offered to a couple or lone parent with 4 or 5 children.

Back to top

Council Housing Allocation Policy (October 2022)

13. Under this new scheme (scheme 2) priority is awarded by placing applicants in one of four Priority Bands with Band 1 having the highest priority, and Band 4 having the lowest:

• Band 1: includes those with Emergency Priority such as applicants referred by another agency because if they have an Emergency Medical Priority.
• Band 2: includes those with High Medical Priority or overcrowded by 3 bedrooms, for example.
• Band 3: includes those overcrowded by 2 bedrooms or who have medical priority, for example.
• Band 4: includes those overcrowded by 1 bedroom, for example.

14. Under the policy, it was the applicant’s responsibility to keep the housing application up to date if circumstances change. It warned an applicant had to review their application and re-register on the housing register annually. The Council would send a reminder about it.
15. If the case gave rise to medical issues, an applicant has to complete an online medical form.
16. An applicant can only bid successfully for accommodation of the right size for the household’s needs. The Council decides this based on the following:

• 1 bedroom or studio for applicant and partner;
• 1 bedroom for every two children of the same sex, under the age of 21;
• 1 bedroom for a child of the opposite sex to another child, if the child is aged over 10;
• 1 bedroom for any other person over 21.

17. Three-bedroom properties are offered to a couple or lone parent with two children not of the same sex where one is over 10 years old, or with three children.
18. Four-bedroom properties are offered to a couple or lone parent with 4 or 5 children.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

19. I considered all the information Miss K sent, the notes a colleague made of their telephone conversations, and the Council’s response to my enquiries. I sent a copy of my draft decision to Miss K and the Council. I considered their responses.

Back to top

What I found

20. Miss K lived in two-bedroom accommodation she rented from Lewisham Homes. Until October 2023, Lewisham Homes was an Arm’s Length Management Organisation (ALMO) set up by the Council. ALMOs were set up to manage and improve all, or part, of a council’s housing stock. They are completely separate from a council and are usually a not-for-profit limited company. The Council still had responsibility for overseeing and monitoring its work.
21. She joined the housing register in 2015 as she wished to move. She had three children. At the time she was overcrowded by 1 bedroom and the Council assumed she was awarded Band 3 under its housing allocation scheme in force at the time (scheme 1). The Council assumed this because its records do not show her banding for this period. She began to bid for three-bedroom properties.
22. In 2021, she gave birth to her youngest child. This was a change of circumstance she needed to tell the Council about as it would affect her housing application and Priority Band awarded under scheme 1.
23. She now had 4 children. Two sons, aged 13 and 12, shared a bedroom. Her 7-year-old daughter and baby son shared Miss K’s bedroom. Her daughter had health problems which meant she needed the use of the toilet urgently, so Miss K wanted a property with an extra toilet. She was also limited to where she could bid for accommodation because of abuse from her former partner.
24. The process for updating an application for rehousing was:

• complete an online ‘change in occupant’ form on its website (the ‘Tenant’s Portal’) for those who were Council tenants. This could be used to add new born children, for example, and allowed tenants to manage their tenancy; and
• complete a ‘change of circumstances’ form on Lewisham Find Your Homes website (the ‘Bidding Portal’). The Bidding Portal was for applicants to decide which advertised property they wished to bid and be considered for. When accessing this, applicants could not see their family composition, only the bedroom entitlement. This form allowed an applicant to update the rehousing application to show a newborn listed on the housing application, for example. Information on this form was cross checked with the tenancy details and validated.

25. Neither of these forms were linked but both needed completing to ensure they reflected the same information.
26. The Council confirmed both systems needed updating. Miss K needed to complete a change of circumstances form on the Bidding Portal. If the tenancy details have not been updated, applicants had to complete a change of occupant form through the Tenant’s Portal.
27. Miss K claimed she was unable to load the information needed onto the Tenant’s Portal to update her tenancy. She sent the Council an email in December 2021 asking how to update it. She received no response.
28. In January 2022, she emailed the Council again asking how to do this. About a week later, Miss K spoke to an officer from Lewisham Homes about adding her young child to her account. There was no record of this conversation but, later that day, the officer emailed her and referred to the earlier conversation they had.
29. The email told her how to add her youngest child to the tenancy account through the Tenant’s Portal. The email said once she had done this, the Council could help her add the child to her bidding application (the Bidding Portal) as she had difficulties doing this too. It ended by saying if she had any questions, to contact the Council.
30. The following month, the Council replied to her MP about the same issues she raised. It explained she was in Band 3 and needed an extra bedroom. It also explained how she could access help to update her household’s details. Once updated, Miss K would be entitled to a 4-bedroom property and move to Band 2. The letter said should Miss K need help, she could contact the Housing Management team. It gave a contact number to call if she needed help and explained which options to press when connected.
31. The Council confirmed she completed a ‘change of occupant’ form through the Tenant's Portal in March 2022. This meant it added her baby to the tenancy household. While the Council has no record of the email sent to her confirming this, Miss K sent me a copy of it. The email is from Lewisham Homes and confirmed her request to add her youngest child, ‘has been completed’.
32. The Council explained Miss K failed to take the further step which was to update her rehousing application account through the Bidding Portal. It accepted she needed help doing this but with changes of staff, this was not followed up. Had she done this, she would have been eligible to bid for 3- or 4-bedroom properties in 2022. It noted she already had a 3 bedroom need even before adding her baby.
33. When it brought in scheme 2 in October, it wrote to Miss K about it the same month. The letter gave general information about how applicants in Priority Bands under scheme 1 would be in different, lower Bands under scheme 2. It gave an example of applicants in Band 3 because they were one bedroom short. They would now move to Band 4. The letter confirmed if she believed she was eligible for a higher band, she needed to check her account by logging in and completing the change of circumstances form.
34. Miss K said the letter gave no personal information or details about who was listed on her application. She said she had no reason to think it was not up to date.
35. In June 2023, she complained about a separate issue, and it was only in August Miss K realised her rehousing application through the Bidding Portal had not been updated to include her youngest child. She complained as she believed the officer she spoke to in January 2022 had updated it. She argued had the officer done it, she would have had a higher Priority Band when bidding for accommodation over the previous 17 months.
36. The Council updated her rehousing account in August, when responding to her complaint, to include the youngest child. She moved from Band 4 to Band 3 as she was now overcrowded by 2 bedrooms. The Council told her she was eligible to bid for 4-bedroom properties and had a list date of September 2021. It was backdated to this date as this was when her youngest child was born.
37. The Council accepted it could not say how this was assessed as it had no completed change of circumstances form and nor had Miss K uploaded a birth certificate. Miss K said the Council had the documents as she uploaded them when she told it about the change of occupant through the Tenant’s Portal.
38. Up to this point, Miss K claimed she continued only to bid for 3-bedroom properties as she believed that was correct. She says this was because of confusion under its housing allocation policy.
39. In September, the Council told her why she could not view a 4-bedroom house on its website. This was because it wrongly updated her application to show there were seven occupants on it. This happened as there was a blank space under the household member list on its computer system. The property had a maximum occupancy of six people. The Council corrected her record promptly. It also explained this property would not have been allocated to her as the successful applicant was in Band 1.
40. In October, when she called the Council, Miss K claimed she was told she was eligible only for a 3-bedroom property. The Council replied saying she could bid for 3- or 4-bedroom properties for certain landlords but for all other landlords, she was registered for a 4-bedroom property. She was then also told the Council would change her list date to 5 October 2023. The Council confirmed she completed a change of circumstances form and uploaded documents in support including a birth certificate and medical information through the Bidding Portal. Miss K sent a copy of an email she received confirming this upload of documents. Lewisham Homes was notified of this to update its records.
41. In December, the Council accepted her medical needs and approved her for Band 3 with recommendations for a separate toilet and bathroom. Miss K accepted an offer of a 3-bedroom property the same month with a housing association. The Council wrote to her the following month confirming its decision. I have seen a copy of this email which confirmed an award of Medical Priority Band 3. It recommended a property with a separate toilet and bathroom.
42. The Council confirmed:

• Schemes 1 and 2 said it was an applicant’s responsibility to keep a housing application up to date where there was a change of circumstances such as having a baby or a partner moving home.
• Under scheme 2, applicants must review their application and re-register on the housing register annually. A reminder was sent out about this. The Council accepted this was a requirement introduced in October 2022. She was not asked to re-register.
• When an applicant logs into their account, it shows their Band and the property size they can bid for.
• It is currently using a new system under scheme 2 which does not show when her youngest child was added. The new system only came into operation on 22 December 2023 and all her information was still in the process of being transferred to it from the previous system.

43. The Council confirmed as a lone parent with 4 children, two who are over 10 years of age, Miss K had a 4-bedroom need. Four-bedroom properties are offered to those who successfully bid for them which means households made up of a couple or lone parent with four or five children.
44. Miss K was also concerned about the lack of clarity in its policy about bedroom entitlement and siblings sharing a bedroom. While she accepted the policy says two children under 10 years of age must share a room when of the opposite sex, it failed to explain when it does not apply. She gave the example of two children of the opposite sex under 10 but where there are four children in total.
45. The Council explained applicants who have four children, where at least one is over 10, are automatically entitled to a 4-bedroom property. The copy table it sent with its response shows a 4-bedroom entitlement for applicants with 4 or more children.

My findings

46. I make the following findings:
1. Miss K said an officer agreed to update her online account for her when she called in January 2022. There was no record of this call although the email the officer sent later the same day, referred to it. It did not confirm what Miss K claimed. It did not confirm the officer agreed to update her account. What it did say was, ‘As discussed, to add your child to your household, please log onto’ Lewisham Homes website. It gave her the link for this and explained what documents she needed to send in support. It said once added, Lewisham Homes could help with her adding it to her bidding application as she said she had problems with it. It ended by saying to get back in touch if there were any problems.
2. On balance, I am not satisfied the officer agreed to update her account as claimed. This is because there was no other evidence, apart from her own account, to support what Miss K claimed about her telephone conversation with the officer and what she said he agreed. The email contradicted her claim about what the officer said to her. There was nothing in it which referred to the officer agreeing to update her account. If the officer had agreed to do so, he would have had to contact her for supporting documents to allow this to be done. This was because his email said she needed to submit a birth certificate and child benefit letter or child tax credit letter as proof. There was no such contact.
3. I also note in its response to her MP, the Council referred to the email the officer sent the previous month. It confirmed the officer advised her to complete the online change of circumstances form and provide supporting evidence so her account could be updated. The response also said if she needed help, she could call a contact number which it gave her.
4. I am satisfied, from the copy email Miss K sent dated March 2022, that she managed to update her tenancy details through the Tenant’s Portal.
5. While she updated her tenancy details, she failed to update her rehousing application details through the Bidding Portal.
6. The Lewisham Find Your Home website had a section titled ‘Telling us about a change in your circumstances’. It advised applicants to tell it about changes by logging online (the Bidding Portal) to their rehousing application and completing a ‘change of circumstance’ form. It gave instructions about how to do this once logged in. It also said they were expected to provide supporting documents at the time of the request.
7. There is no evidence of Miss K logging on to update her rehousing account through the Bidding Portal, uploading supporting documents, or contacting either Lewisham Homes or the Council to ask for help.
8. While the Council accepted she needed help, and it had not followed this up because of changes in staff, on balance, I am not satisfied this amounted to fault in these circumstances. This is because it had told her on different occasions what she had to do and if she needed help, to contact it. The main responsibility was, therefore, on Miss K to ask for help if needed.
9. While Miss K was unable to bid for a property in September 2023 because of an error with the spacing on her records, this caused her no injustice as it went to an applicant who had higher Priority Banding than her anyway.

Back to top

Final decision

47. I found no fault on Miss K’s complaint against the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman