Summary: Miss X complained the Council has not done enough to help her secure suitable accommodation since accepting her onto its housing register. We do not find fault with the action the Council has taken.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about how the Council handled her housing application. Miss X says the Council accepted she is living in unsuitable accommodation but has not done enough to help her secure a suitable home. Miss X says the Council has blocked her attempts to apply for more suitable properties that meet the majority of her household’s needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)
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

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke to Miss X about her complaint and considered information she provided. I also considered information received from the Council.
6. Miss X 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

Housing allocations

7. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. Councils must make all allocations in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, Section 166A(1) & (14))
8. Councils must tell applicants in writing whether they are eligible for an allocation and any reasonable preference, with its reasons.
9. Councils must also tell applicants of their right to request a review of these allocations decisions. (Housing Act 1996, Section 166A(9))
10. An allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants in the following categories:
• Homeless people.
• People in unsanitary, overcrowded, or unsatisfactory housing.
• People who need to move on medical or welfare grounds.
• People who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others.
  (Housing Act 1996, Section 166A(3))
11. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application or a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme.

The Council’s allocations policy

12. The Council uses a grouping system of five bands to determine the priority of applicants on its housing register.
13. The Council places applicants in a group based on their current housing circumstances and need. These bands are defined within the Council’s allocations policy with Band 1 being the highest priority and Band 5 being the lowest.
14. Once applicants are banded, the Council operates a choice-based lettings process, meaning they can bid for properties they are interested in. However, there are some situations where the Council limits an applicant’s choice to a particular type of property or area, for example where a specific medical priority is awarded.
15. If a property is already adapted to meet specific needs, it will be advertised on the Council’s Accessible Housing Register so that preference is given to applicants where a member of the household requires that adaptation. Viewings of adapted properties are usually accompanied by an Occupational Therapist (OT) or medical officer to determine if the property meets the applicant’s needs.

What happened

16. Miss X applied to join the Council’s housing register in November 2022. Miss X provided evidence of a medical condition that means her son, Y, requires specialised equipment including a wheelchair and pushchair, and adaptations to be able to use the bath. Miss X explained she currently lived in a three-bedroom property, on the 4th floor and the lifts in her building frequently failed, meaning access to and from her home could be difficult, particularly with Y’s equipment.
17. The Council consulted with an independent medical service. They advised Y would require space for extra equipment as he grew older, it was becoming more difficult to make use of the bath, and he would benefit from a level access property.
18. The Council wrote to Miss X the following week to explain it had considered all the available evidence and advice. It explained it had accepted her application onto the housing register with medical priority in Band 3. The Council said it had placed Miss X on its Accessible Housing Register and she was entitled to bid for three-bedroom properties that:
• were on the ground floor if there was no lift;
• on any floor if there was lifted level access throughout;
• had a wet room; and
• had space for storage of equipment.
19. The Council explained it had restricted Miss X’s choice of property’s based on the information it had received to ensure her future property met the relevant medical needs of her household.
20. One property meeting all Miss X’s household needs became available in March 2023 and she was shortlisted for this, but it was offered to a bidder with higher priority.
21. Miss X told the Council she was unhappy she could not bid for certain properties and the Council reiterated it had only bypassed her for properties that did not meet the needs of her household.
22. In August 2023 Miss X was shortlisted for another property, however this was then withdrawn as, on review, a medical officer deemed it to be unsuitable for her household needs.
23. Miss X complained to the Council as she felt it was bypassing her for some properties that would suit her needs.
24. The Council responded to explain it had set the criteria of property that Miss X could bid on based on Y’s medical assessment and reports. It explained Miss X could not bid on any property that did not meet these criteria and she had only been bypassed on unsuitable properties. The Council said it recognised Miss X’s current property was also not suitable, but said it needed to ensure she moved to a property that met all her household’s needs. The Council also acknowledged there was a severe lack of adapted properties and said Miss X could be shortlisted for a property with most of the required adaptations but only if it could then be fully adapted.
25. Miss X asked the Council to reconsider her complaint. She said it did not properly consider that properties could be adapted to be more suitable for Y’s needs and said she felt she did not believe her household needed level access.
26. The Council responded to explain the adaptations it stipulated as necessary for Miss X to bid on a property were based on medical advice. It explained it needed to ensure the property would be suitable for Miss X’s household in the long term, but it would review the required adaptations if Miss X or Y’s circumstances were to change.
27. In November 2023, Miss X provided updated medical evidence for the Council to review. The Council did so and updated Miss X’s housing application to reflect her housing needs as:
• a level access property with a graded shower floor or wet room;
• space for storage of equipment;
• disability parking bay or the possibility to apply for a disabled parking space near the property.
28. Shortly after this, Miss X was shortlisted for two properties. However, both were then offered to bidders with a higher priority.
29. Miss X was then shortlisted for a further two properties, but these were withdrawn as unsuitable following a review by a Council medical officer.
30. In response to our enquiries the Council explained:
• Miss X is currently on a waiting list for a new housing needs assessment to establish if it can provide further support while she is waiting to be rehoused;
• Its Children’s Social Care team has been in touch with Miss X and is in the process of assessing her needs to establish if it owes her any additional duties under the Children Act 1989;
• It considers it is reasonable for Miss X to occupy her current property until more suitable accommodation is found; and
• There is a limited supply of adapted properties but if a property on the Accessible Housing Register meets most of the required adaptations, it will seek to make outstanding adaptations where it is feasible to do so, but this is not always possible.
31. The Council also provided a list of properties that were on the Accessible Housing Register but which were not available for Miss X to bid on. The Council has also explained the reason why each of these properties were not available to Miss X and which of the necessary adaptations were available or not available.

Analysis

32. Miss X applied to join the Council’s housing register in November 2022. The Council considered all the available evidence, consulted with the relevant professionals and accepted Miss X onto its housing register at Band 3 in line with its usual policy. I do not find the Council at fault here.
33. I understand Miss X’s frustration that the Council has limited the properties she is able to bid on, but this in itself is not a reason to find the Council at fault. The Council’s policy enables it to restrict what properties are available to an applicant if they need certain adaptations. The Council has only restricted the properties available to Miss X where they had no adaptations, or not the relevant adaptations for her household’s needs. The Council’s decision-making was based on the medical advice it received and I do not find the Council at fault here.
34. Miss X has said she feels the Council ought to allow her to bid for properties that meet most of her household needs and requires only a few more adaptations. The Council has explained this is something it considers but it is not always possible to make the outstanding adaptations. The Council has provided the list of adapted properties that did not have all adaptations Miss X requires and has explained these could not be adapted further to meet all those needs. I do not find the Council at fault here.
35. There have only been two relevantly adapted properties available to Miss X where she would have been the highest bidder since she joined the housing register. However, the Council withdrew these following advice from medical officers on the suitability of the properties. I understand this must be frustrating for Miss X, but the Council appears to be taking the relevant advice and I could not find fault with its decision-making process here.
36. The Council has also set out the action it is taking to explore whether it can provide Miss X with further support or if it owes her any additional duties under the Children Act 1989. I find no fault with the Council here. If Miss X is unhappy with the outcome of the Council’s considerations, she would be free to raise a new complaint about this.

Back to top

Final decision

37. I do not find the Council at fault, and I have ended my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman