Summary: Mr B complained how the Council handled his application to rejoin the housing register. He says the Council has not properly considered his medical evidence and mobility issues, and it has taken too long to complete its review. He also complained the Council has failed to provide him with adult social care support despite his repeated requests. We find the Council was at fault for its significant delays in dealing with Mr B’s review request. It was also at fault for how it handled Mr B’s requests for adult social care support. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

The complaint

1. Mr B complained how the Council handled his application to rejoin the housing register. He says the Council has not properly considered his medical evidence and mobility issues, and it has taken too long to complete its review. Mr B also says the Council has failed to provide him with adult social care (ASC) support despite his repeated requests.
2. Mr B says the Council’s failures have caused him severe distress and upset.

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 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. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. 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

6. We have investigated a previous complaint from Mr B under reference (23002348). We will not revisit those matters in this investigation.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information from Mr B. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered information it sent in response.
8. Mr B and the Council now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Council’s housing allocations scheme

9. The Council’s housing allocations scheme describes how the Council assesses applications for housing, prioritises each application and decides which applicant will be offered a council or housing association home.
10. The scheme sets out people with high levels of assessed housing need who the Council is required to give reasonable preference to. This includes people who:

• Live in unsanitary or overcrowded housing;
• Need to move on medical or welfare grounds;
• Need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others.

Review procedures

11. 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.

12. The Council must also notify the applicant of the right to request a review of these decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))
13. Statutory guidance on the allocation of accommodation says reviews should normally be completed within a set deadline – eight weeks is suggested as reasonable.

The care and support statutory guidance

14. This guidance sets out how councils should perform their care and support responsibilities. The assessment process is one of the most important elements of the care and support system. It starts from when councils begin to collect information about a person. It can help people understand their strengths and capabilities, and the support available to them in the community and through other networks and services. An assessment may come in different forms, including an online or phone assessment or a face-to-face assessment. The nature of the assessment could range from an initial contact or triage process which helps a person with lower needs to access support in their local community, to a more intensive, ongoing process which requires the input of several professionals over a longer period of time.

What happened

15. Mr B lives in council housing. He has experienced issues with his housing for many years. A member of staff from Mr B’s GP surgery contacted the Council’s ASC department in October 2022. They said Mr B was struggling to cope and he wanted some support. The Council reviewed Mr B’s case and noted he had a floating support worker (Officer B) in the housing department. It closed the case.
16. The emergency services sent a referral to the Council’s ASC department about Mr B’s health in November. The ASC department sent the referral to Officer B. The Council was unaware at this stage Officer B had left. It became aware of this in December.
17. Mr B called the Council’s emergency duty team in March 2023 and said he was unwell and needed support. The officer he spoke to sent the referral to the Council’s ASC department. An admissions officer from the emergency services sent the ASC department another referral about Mr B’s health the following day. The Council had not updated its system, and so it sent all the information to Officer B.
18. Mr B moved to new council housing in July 2023. He applied to rejoin the Council’s housing register in late September. He said he was suffering from anxiety and depression, and he could not live in his home because of his medical conditions. The Council sent a letter to Mr B in early October and said he did not qualify to join the housing register because his application did not demonstrate a need for social housing. It said he could request a review within 21 days.
19. Mr B sent a further application to join the housing register just over a week later. He said he had issues getting into his home due to the number of stairs. He also said his home had damp and mould. He emailed the Council on 13 October and asked it to review its decision to refuse his application to join the housing register. He said there were multiple disrepair issues which were affecting his health.
20. The Council sent Mr B a medical questionnaire to complete in December. Mr B returned the questionnaire in late December. He provided further information about his health and how the living in the property was making his health worse.
21. Mr B complained to the Council in late January 2024. He said it failed to provide ASC support despite his repeated requests. He also said he wanted to rejoin the housing register as he was living in a property what was in a stair of disrepair and was unsuitable for his medical needs. The Council responded to Mr B’s complaint in April. It addressed the issues of disrepair, but it did not address the issues of the lack of ASC support or Mr B’s request to rejoin the housing register.
22. The Council issued its decision on Mr B’s review request on 21 May. It said there was no evidence his current housing was making his medical issues worse, and it was likely they would still exist if he moved house. It said it did not have any information to suggest he could not manage the steps to his property. It also said work was being done to his property to resolve the disrepair issues. It said if he disagreed with its response, he could ask for a stage two review within 21 days.
23. The Council issued a further response to Mr B’s complaint in May after he contacted the Ombudsman. It apologised for the delay in responding to his review request.
24. Mr B called the Council’s ASC department in early June. He said it failed to help him in the past and his health had suffered. The duty worker agreed to speak to the manager to see if there was anything the ASC department could help with.
25. Mr B sent in further documents for his stage two review in mid-June and early July. The Council is currently reviewing the documents and has not yet issued its decision.
26. After I sent my enquiry letter, the Council wrote to Mr B in August with its complaint response about the ASC issues. It apologised for its delay in realising Officer B had left, its failure to update the system and its failure to work collaboratively between departments. It said it ASC department had now redesigned its services to prevent a recurrence of further similar faults.

Back to top

Analysis

27. Statutory guidance says councils should complete review requests within eight weeks. In Mr B’s case, he asked for a review in October 2023. The Council did not ask Mr B to complete the medical questionnaire until December 2023, which is a delay. Mr B promptly returned the questionnaire, but the Council then took a further five months to issue its response. This is a further significant delay and is fault. Mr B has now asked for a stage two review, and the Council has yet to complete this. If it had acted without fault, Mr B would have received the stage two decision several months ago. The continual delays have caused Mr B frustration and upset which the Council needs to remedy. I have not recommended any service improvements as we asked the Council in a recent similar case to provide an action plan showing the action it is taking to reduce delays when completing review requests.
28. While I have found with the Council’s delay, I have not found fault with its stage one review. It is detailed and addressed the evidence Mr B provided. It explained while it accepts Mr B has medical conditions, there was not enough evidence to suggest the property was making his conditions worse. That was a decision it was entitled to take based on the information it received. Mr B has now provided more evidence for the stage two review, and the Council will need to review this evidence before it makes its decision.
29. The Council is at fault for how it has handled Mr B’s requests for ASC support. The ASC department has received several referrals and requests for help for Mr B since October 2022. Officers decided Mr B was receiving support from Officer B and therefore did not take any further action. The Council was at fault for this. Firstly, there is no evidence the Council undertook any assessments to determine what help Mr B was receiving from Officer B (housing department), and whether he required any further help and support from the ASC department. Secondly, when the Council became aware Officer B had left, it failed to update the system. This meant it sent referrals to an officer that could not provide Mr B with any support. There was also no collaborative working between departments. These faults have caused Mr B upset and distress. He also has some uncertainty that he may have had access to help and support if the Council had acted without fault. The Council has recently (June 2024) agreed to see whether Mr B requires any ASC support. To achieve this, it should complete an assessment of Mr B’s needs in the format it considers is most appropriate.
30. I am also concerned with how the Council has handled Mr B’s complaint. Mr B raised several issues in his complaint in January 2024. The Council responded to Mr B’s complaint in April and only addressed the disrepair issues. It did not address the issues about his application to rejoin the housing register or the lack of ASC support. After prompting from the Ombudsman, the Council responded to the issues about housing register in May. This is significantly outside its timescales of 10 working days for a stage one response. However, it did not address the ASC issues. It only did so after I sent my enquiry letter. This is a further significant delay. The Council’s fault in its complaints handling has caused Mr B further frustration and upset.

Back to top

Agreed action

31. By 18 October 2024 the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Mr B for the injustice caused by the faults identified in this statement.
• Pay Mr B £350 for his frustration, upset, uncertainty and distress.
• Complete the stage two review of its decision to refuse Mr B’s application to rejoin the housing register. If it reverses its decision, it should backdate Mr B’s registration date to September 2023.

32. By 15 November 2024 the Council has agreed to:

• Complete an assessment in the format it considers is most appropriate to determine whether Mr B has any ASC needs.
• Issue written reminders to relevant officers to ensure they fully address all the issues raised in a complaint within the timescales set out in the complaints policy.

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 B an injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and so I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman