Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council handled her application to join its housing register. We find the Council at fault for giving Miss X incorrect information and for failing to respond to her. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X, respond to her application and make a payment to recognise the injustice caused to her.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of an application she made to join the housing register on medical grounds in August 2023. Miss X has said the Council advised her to make this application but has since ignored her.

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 a Council made its decision. If there was no fault in how the Council made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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)
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 cannot investigate complaints about events that took place more than 12 months before a complainant contacted the Ombudsman. We can only exercise discretion if there are good reasons to do so.
7. Miss X first contacted the Ombudsman in December 2023, meaning anything that took place before December 2022 has been raised late.
8. The circumstances around Miss X’s complaint go back as far as April 2022, but I have seen no reason why she could not have complained to us sooner if she wanted events from that time to be investigated. For this reason, I have not exercised discretion to look back any further than December 2022.
9. Any reference below to events that took place before December 2022 are for reference only.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I spoke to Miss X about her complaint and considered information she provided. I also considered information received from the Council.
11. 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

Relevant law and policy

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))

The Council’s policy

13. The Council publishes its Housing Allocation Scheme on its website. This sets out how it prioritises applicants and its procedures for allocating housing.
14. The Council’s policy also sets out where an applicant will not be admitted to the housing register and qualify for an allocation, even if they would have satisfied the reasonable preference criteria. This section explains that applicants who have been made an offer of a suitable and reasonable secure assured tenancy within the borough but did not accept that offer, will be cancelled from the register for a period of no less than 24 months.

What happened

15. In April 2022 the Council made Miss X an offer of what it deemed to be suitable accommodation, but Miss X refused this. As a consequence, the Council removed Miss X from its housing register for a period of 24 months, meaning she would not be eligible to reapply until April 2024.
16. Miss X contacted the Council in March 2023. She explained she did not feel the property the Council had offered in April 2022 was suitable for her and felt it had been dismissive of her concerns. Miss X asked the Council to offer her another property.
17. The Council responded to Miss X to say she had the right to ask it to review the suitability of the property within 21 days but she had not appealed at the time.
18. Miss X asked the Council to reconsider its position. Miss X said she had not felt able to make an appeal in April 2022. Miss X explained she still needed to be rehoused and her current living situation was affecting her mental health.
19. The Council responded to Miss X in July 2023. The Council said it had followed the right process in offering Miss X a suitable property and she had not asked it to review this decision. However, the Council said this would not exclude Miss X from reapplying to the housing register on medical grounds.
20. In August 2023, Miss X submitted a new application to join the Council’s housing register. As part of the application, Miss X indicated a move to a new property would be beneficial to her on medical grounds. Miss X explained she had been advised to make this application by the Council and provided a letter from her doctor to support her application.
21. As she did not receive a response, Miss X chased the Council multiple times by phone and email between August 2023 and February 2024. Miss X explained she had submitted a new application on the advice of the Council and was still waiting for a response to this.
22. The Council responded to Miss X in February 2024, following contact from her MP. The Council explained Miss X would not be eligible to reapply for its housing register until April 2024 as this would be 24 months after she had refused an offer of suitable accommodation. The Council said it would assess Miss X’s application accordingly once it reached that date.

Analysis

23. The Council’s policy explains any applicant who refuses an offer of suitable accommodation will be removed from its housing register and cannot rejoin for 24 months. As Miss X refused an offer of accommodation in April 2022 and did not appeal the suitability of the property, the Council has said she could not rejoin its housing register until April 2024. The Council followed its usual process when making this decision and so I cannot find it at fault.
24. However, the Council told Miss X in July 2023 that she could reapply on medical grounds which prompted her application in August 2023. There is nothing in the Council’s policy to suggest the 24-month waiting period can be bypassed if the applicant reapplies on medical grounds. This means the Council gave Miss X incorrect information here, which is fault and caused uncertainty around when she could reapply, which is injustice.
25. While I could not expect the Council to accept an application that was excluded under its usual policy, the Council made no real effort to explain this to Miss X. I cannot see the Council attempted to correct the wrong information it had given to Miss X or respond to her application, which is fault. Miss X was caused considerable uncertainty here and had to chase the Council for months to get an answer, which is injustice.

Back to top

Agreed action

26. To remedy the injustice identified above, the Council has agreed to carry out the following actions within one month:
• Apologise to Miss X for the injustice caused to her by the faults identified above;
• Pay Miss X £200 to recognise the uncertainty caused to her; and
• Provide Miss X with a response to her application.
27. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I find the Council at fault for providing Miss X with incorrect information and for failing to respond to her. The Council accepted the recommendations above 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