Summary: Mr P complains about the Council’s delay in dealing with his application to join its housing register. He also complains the Council did not give him information about how he could bid.­ We uphold the complaint. In response to our investigation, the Council has offered a remedy, which is adequate.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Mr P) complains:
• the Council took more than a year to deal with his application to join its housing register; and
• he did not receive a decision letter or information about how they could bid. This was despite the Council’s complaint responses upholding his complaints.

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. 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

4. As part of the investigation, we have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Mr P;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered its response;
• spoken to Mr P;
• sent a draft decision and considered Mr P’s and the Council’s responses.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

5. 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))
6. The Council operates:
• a banding system for deciding priority on its waiting list. Band 1 is the highest priority and Band 4 the lowest. Within a band, the applicants who have been waiting longest get the highest priority;
• a choice-based lettings scheme which enables housing applicants to bid for available properties which it advertises.

What happened

7. At the beginning of November 2022, Mr P applied to join the Council’s housing register, after his mother-in-law moved into their home. Mr P says they applied as two members of the family were severely disabled.
8. In early February 2023 Mr P complained about a delay in processing his application.
9. At the end of February the Council’s Housing Applications Officer began the housing application process. The Council sent Mr P a letter requesting documents to verify the application.
10. At the beginning of March the Council responded to Mr P’s complaint. It advised his application was at “the pending stage”. It was taking around 20 weeks for the Council to process applications. It apologised for the delay. It said he would not be disadvantaged by the delay because his “form ha[d] been backdated, so you do not lost time because…[of] the delay”.
11. In June 2023 Mr P could still not bid, so he made another complaint. In July the Council responded at the second stage of its complaints procedure. It advised:
• It had placed Mr P’s application in Band 4;
• he could now bid for suitable accommodation;
• it upheld his complaint.
12. In January 2024 Mr P sent the Council some documents to support an increase in his Band on medical grounds. The Council considered this information and did not increase Mr P’s banding on medical grounds. But it did increase Mr P’s banding to Band 3, based on overcrowding. He was eligible to bid for four-bedroom properties.
13. Mr P complained to the Ombudsman. In response to my enquiries, the Council advised that:
• Mr P’s current housing register status was Band 3 with an effective date of January 2024. But it would backdate the start date to December 2022 once the Ombudsman confirmed that approach;
• it did not have evidence it had notified Mr P of the decision on the January 2024 change in Band;
• towards the end of February 2024 (so after Mr P’s complaint to the Ombudsman), it had emailed him confirming his application was active. The email contained a link to information about how to bid.
14. Also in response to my enquiries, the Council advised:
• it had looked at all the four-bedroom properties it had let between December 2022 (when Mr P first applied) and February 2024 (when it notified Mr P of how he could bid). It said there were no properties let to Band 3 applicants that Mr P’s family might have successfully bid for;
• it offered Mr P a symbolic payment of £640 for the “…significant delay they have received in their application being delayed from 3rd December 2022 to 21st February 2024. This has been based on:

Delay = £320 (64 weeks at £5 per week)

Distress = £320 (64 weeks at £5 per week).”

15. The Council says that Mr P bid for the first time in March 2024.

Analysis

16. The evidence demonstrates the following fault by the Council:
• a delay in dealing with Mr P’s application; and
• not notifying Mr P when the Council changed its decision on his banding.
17. In response to Mr P’s complaint to the Ombudsman, the Council has accepted this fault. And it has:
1. accepted a delay in processing Mr P’s application to join its register. It has:
1. offered a symbolic payment as a remedy;
2. agreed to backdate the start of Mr P’s Band 3 priority to December 2022;
2. checked whether Mr P and his family might have successfully bid but for its delay. It says they did not miss any opportunities.
18. Looking at the Council’s offer and comparing it to the approach set out in our Guidance on Remedies, my decision is the Council’s offer, with the addition of a letter of apology, is in-line with the Ombudsman’s approach.

Back to top

Agreed action

19. The Council has agreed that, within a month of my final decision, it:
• apologise to Mr P, taking the approach set out in our Guidance on Remedies;
• make Mr P the payments it has offered in response to my enquiries.
20. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I to uphold the complaint. The remedy the Council has offered, with the addition of a formal apology, is satisfactory. 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