Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of his brother Mr Y that the Council failed to respond properly to his reports about anti-social behaviour and harassment. He says the Council delayed an emergency transfer. There was delay by the Council causing Mr Y avoidable distress. The Council has agreed a financial remedy.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains on behalf of his brother Mr Y about the Council’s:
• Failure to contact Mr X about all matters concerning Mr Y;
• Poor handling of reports of cuckooing and drug dealing;
• Delay in transferring Mr Y to alternative accommodation as an emergency transfer; and
• Failure to respond to his requests for an increase in medical points.
2. As a result, Mr X says his vulnerable disabled brother lived in unsuitable accommodation for longer than necessary causing him anxiety and distress.

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. 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

5. I have investigated how the Council responded to Mr Y’s reports of anti social behaviour from January 2023 to January 2024 and how it dealt with his request for a transfer from his home which he made in May 2023, to January 2024, when Mr X complained to the Ombudsman.
6. Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of matters including its response to anti-social behaviour from September 2022 and earlier.
7. 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)
8. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman in January 2024. Mr X’s complaint is late, and I do not consider there are good reasons to investigate matters before January 2023.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant legislation and guidance

Housing allocations

11. 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))

Reasonable preference

12. An allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants in the following categories:
• homeless people;
• people in insanitary, 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))

The Council’s housing allocations policy

13. The Council’s policy states that applicants will be placed in Band A for reasons such as emergencies. This includes
• threat of serious violence to a Council tenant,
• life threatening medical emergency
• statutory overcrowded Council tenants
• environmental health referrals - emergency rehousing
• refuge accommodation - at risk of domestic violence
14. Within Band A there are two levels: Level 1 and Level 2. All applicants in Band A are in emergency situations or have very high priority, and generally have a similar, very high level of need. Applicants will therefore be placed on Level 2.
15. However, a case may be recognised as exceptionally urgent (bearing in mind that all Band A cases are emergencies or very high priority), in which case the Council has discretion to place the applicant on Level 1.

What happened

16. What follows is a brief summary of key events. It is not meant to be a detailed chronology.
17. Mr Y was living in Council accommodation and had reported anti social behaviour and harassment from residents and others towards him in September 2022. The Council had opened a tenancy enforcement investigation. It sent diary sheets to Mr Y to complete.
18. In January 2023 Mr Y emailed the Council to say a neighbour was on drugs and threw objects at their friend. The tenancy enforcement officer asked Mr Y to return completed diary sheets regarding anti social behaviour and to contact the Police about potential criminal behaviour.
19. In February the Council’s officer called Mr Y regarding the diary sheets. Mr Y said he had not received these, and questioned why he needed to complete them.
20. In March 2023 the Council received a response from the Police that it had not received any crime reports in the last year. The Council carried out a door knocking exercise in Mr Y’s estate to see if other residents were affected by anti-social behaviour. However, this did not provide evidence to support Mr Y’s claims.
21. At the end of March the tenancy enforcement officer spoke to Mr Y. He agreed to use the Council’s anti social behaviour app and to report hate crime to the Police. The officer said he would monitor the issue and would contact Mr Y every two weeks. The Council sent a warning letter to Mr Y’s neighbour.
22. The Council called Mr Y in April but there was no reply.
23. In May 2023 Mr X reported Mr Y was assaulted by a neighbour. The Police were called and made arrests. Mr X said his brother no longer felt safe and was at risk. He asked the Council to help Mr Y move and place him on the housing register.
24. The Council sent information to Mr X regarding how to apply. It said that if Mr Y required an emergency transfer, it would need a report from the agencies involved, and a Police crime reference number.
25. On 5 June 2023 the Council received Mr Y’s completed housing register application. He said he needed to move because he was at risk or experiencing harm. He gave details of the incident in May.
26. In early July 2023 the Council received an “At risk of violence” form signed by Mr Y. The form contained a declaration signed by Mr Y and guidance regarding the Council’s Emergency Panel which considers emergency transfer requests. Mr Y did not provide a Police crime reference number on the form.
27. On 30 August 2023 Mr X complained that Mr Y’s housing officer had not responded to almost all their emails and had ignored Mr Y’s emergency housing transfer application made months before.
28. In late September 2023 the Council requested information from the Police about the incident in May 2023.
29. On 29 September 2023 the Council replied to Mr X’s complaint. It upheld his complaint that there was little response from the housing officer. It explained that an officer had been on leave for an extended period. It apologised for this.
30. The Council said
• its housing manager and tenancy enforcement manager had discussed Mr Y’s case and his transfer application had now been registered. Mr Y could now bid for alternative properties.
• it sent Mr Y an “At risk of violence form” to complete and sign. Once it had received this and supporting information, including disclosure from the Police, the Council said it would submit this to the emergency panel.
• It would send Mr Y an online medical transfer form to complete.
• it would carry out a door knocking exercise to gather information about anti social behaviour in the area.
31. The Council registered Mr Y’s emergency transfer application. The Council emailed Mr Y to confirm that his priority band was D and sent him a link to a medical form to complete. However, Mr Y replied he was unable complete the medical form.
32. On 9 October 2023 the Council tried to call Mr X and Mr Y but there was no reply.
33. In late October Mr Y requested emergency temporary accommodation. He said he had left his home due to gangs outside his home and objects had been thrown at his home. He said he feared for his life. He sent further emails when he received no reply. The Council says it tried to call Mr Y, but it was unsuccessful.
34. On 31 October the Council’s housing options team interviewed Mr Y. The Council considered Mr Y’s homeless approach and request for emergency temporary accommodation. It asked for identity documents. The officer sought information from Mr Y’s housing officer regarding the reported gang violence. He also asked Mr Y to provide information from the Police as the Council had not received any information or risk assessment from the Police.
35. In early November 2023 Mr X helped Mr Y to complete and return a further “At risk of Violence” form and declaration. Mr X said that the Police had advised in the summer of that Mr Y was a potential victim of cuckooing. The Police had said they would liaise with the Council, but he had not received an update.
36. The Council’s housing options officer and housing officer discussed the case and potential temporary accommodation. The Council required Police disclosure, risk assessments and mental health supporting information. It had requested this information, from the relevant organisations but had not received it. The Council sent emails chasing responses.
37. Following a call from Mr Y, the housing officer emailed explaining the process for an emergency transfer request. When the Council received the Police and mental health services supporting information, the Council’s emergency panel would consider Mr Y’s request. The housing officer said that at the same time the Council’s housing options team were considering Mr Y’s request for temporary accommodation.
38. Later in November 2023 the Council’s tenancy enforcement officer called Mr Y but he was angry and shouted that the Council should call his brother, Mr X. Mr Y told the Council he had moved out, but he still saw the threatening neighbour who insulted him.
39. The tenancy enforcement officer suggested mediation with the neighbour and Mr Y agreed to this. The Council also arranged a meeting with Mr X and Mr Y regarding the anti social behaviour, but they failed to attend the meeting.
40. On 13 November Mr X complained on Mr Y’s behalf that
• the Council failed to send documents to him rather than Mr Y, and to contact Mr X only as Mr Y has complex metal health needs.
• The housing officer did not respond to reports of drug dealing and possible cuckooing.
• Mr Y was not receiving support despite asking the Council for an emergency transfer in June 2023.
• The Council had not increased Mr Y’s priority for a transfer despite Mr X providing medical documents. Mr Y could only bid for disabled properties which were mostly ground floor. He asked the Council to remove the restriction.
41. In December 2023 the Council responded to Mr X’s complaint. It said
• It had added Mr X’s contact details on its system as Mr Y’s preferred point of contact in 2019. It said it was not clear why Mr X was not receiving information. It apologised for this. It revised the contact details to add Mr X’s email address.
• Regarding drug dealing and cuckooing, the housing officer had been on long term leave and this was why Mr Y may not have received a response. Its tenancy enforcement officers had been dealing with the anti-social behaviour reports. It provided its record of contacts and said it had sent a warning letter to a neighbour, conducted a door knocking exercise and requested Police disclosure. The Police responded in March 2023 that there was no evidence to support the allegations of drug dealing and cuckooing.
• Mr Y had completed an “At risk of violence” form and the Council was now processing an emergency transfer request. However, it was still waiting for information from the NHS Mental Health team.
• The Council said that it could not modify Mr Y’s housing priority banding, which was band D. It also said that Mr Y could only bid on properties that aligned with is entitlement. It had not found a medical referral form for Mr Y. It provided a link to complete this.
42. In January 2024 Mr X complained to the Ombudsman because he was dissatisfied with the Council’s response to his complaint. His main concern was that Mr Y had been waiting six month for an emergency transfer. The Council had not advised him it needed a letter regarding Mr Y’s mental health.
43. In its response to our enquiries the Council confirmed it had received information regarding Mr Y’s mental health in January 2024.
44. In February the Council also received a response to its request to the Police for information on Mr Y’s reports about anti social behaviour, threats and harassment.
45. The Police considered there was an ongoing risk to Mr Y from youths gathering outside his home. It also said that he may be a target of cuckooing. It supported Mr Y’s request to be rehomed. It agreed the Council should consider temporary relocation if Mr Y’s rehousing need was critical.
46. In February 2024 the Council’s emergency panel approved Mr Y’s request for an emergency transfer. The Council awarded priority A2 for six months and it advised Mr Y that he could bid for any one bedroom or studio accommodation in any arear apart from his current estate.
47. The Council’s housing options team also considered it should offer Mr Y temporary accommodation because he was homeless and in priority need due to being at risk. The Council offered Mr Y accommodation in mid February, but it appears he did not accept this.
48. In March 2024 Mr X received the Council’s emergency panel decision. This said Mr Y could request a review by sending a request to a PO Box address. Mr X emailed that he wanted to request a review of the decision because he believed Mr Y should be in band A1, the highest priority due to his circumstances. Mr X asked why the Council would not accept an emailed review request.
49. The Council did not respond to this request for a review until mid May 2024. It apologised for its delay. It agreed to accept a late review by email in view of its failure to respond.
50. On 30 May following Mr X’s review request the Council’s panel agreed to increase Mr Y’s priority to A1.
51. In June 2023 Mr Y bid successfully for a one bedroom property. The Council offered him the flat. However, it required repairs which were not completed by September 2024. The Council considered Mr X’s request for it to offer another property that had become available. The Council offered this flat to Mr Y and he accepted it.

Analysis

Failure to contact Mr X regarding all matters

52. The Council has not explained why despite having recorded Mr X’s telephone number as the point of contact, officers often called Mr Y. This is fault and caused frustration for Mr X and Mr Y. The Council has apologised for this. In response to our enquiries, the Council has confirmed it has added Mr X’s email address and a flag on its system which advises officers to contact Mr X. I consider this is a suitable remedy.

Poor handling of reports of cuckooing and drug dealing

53. Based on the evidence I have seen the Council responded appropriately to Mr Y’s reports of anti social behaviour. It considered the reports, requested information from other residents and sent a warning letter. It also tried to arrange mediation but this did not take place as it had no response. The Council sought further information from the Police but there was no evidence in March 2023.
54. From September 2023 the Council sought evidence disclosure from the Police and sent several reminders. But it was not until February 2024 that it received a response and the first evidence of a potential cuckooing problem. The Council took appropriate action in February 2024 and its emergency panel agreed an increase in priority. I have not found fault here.

Delay in transferring Mr Y to alternative accommodation as an emergency transfer

55. Based on the evidence I have seen there was delay by the Council in registering Mr Y’s housing transfer application between early June 2023 and late September 2023. The Council also appears to have ignored Mr Y’s “At risk of violence” form received in July 2023. The delay caused frustration and anxiety and was identified only when Mr X complained. The Council apologised and explained its housing officer was on leave. Mr Y was able to bid from late September 2023, but I consider the Council took two months longer than we would reasonably expect. I have recommended a remedy.
56. I do not consider the delay in progressing matters regarding Mr Y’s emergency priority between October 2023 and February 2024 was fault by the Council. The Council needed further evidence from the Police and the NHS. The Council chased a response regularly and I do not see the delay here was avoidable.
57. There was delay by the Council in responding to Mr X’s attempts to request a review from mid March 2024. Mr X had emailed a response and queried why the Council did not allow an email review request rather than by post. This was fault. While the Council dealt with this quickly after it responded in May 2024, it caused frustration and anxiety. I cannot say that Mr Y definitely missed out on an earlier offer of accommodation. I note Mr Y did not make many bids for accommodation. However, I accept there was uncertainty here. I have recommended a remedy.

Failure to respond to requests for an increase in medical points

I have not seen evidence that Mr X or Mr Y provided medical information that the Council ignored. The Council asked Mr Y to complete a medical referral form, and it also advised Mr X how to do this in November 2023. However, it says it did not receive a form. I have not seen evidence the Council restricted the type of property Mr Y could bid on. There is no apparent fault here

Back to top

Agreed action

58. I recommended that within one month of my decision the Council
• apologises to Mr Y for the distress and anxiety caused by the faults I have identified here. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• pays Mr Y £300 as a symbolic payment to remedy the distress and uncertainty caused by the Council’s delays when considering his emergency transfer request.
• Considers reviewing its emergency panel decision review process to allow requests by email rather than by writing to a PO Box address.
59. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

60. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman