Summary: There was fault by the Council. The Council removed Mr X from a housing application. Reinstating Mr X’s name on the housing application, along with an apology remedied the injustice caused. It is unlikely Mr X missed any offers of housing and his situation has now changed. There was no fault in the Council following the Occupational Therapists recommendations on the housing type.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr X, complains that his current housing association property is unsuitable and he has been unable to transfer to a property that he would like. Mr X also complains that he was removed from the housing register.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
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. I read the papers put in by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him.
5. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
6. Mr X and the organisation 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

7. Mr X and his partner lived in a housing association property. Mr X has made several complaints about the Council's actions when they made an application to the housing register for a transfer. Mr X complains they were only able to bid for bungalows when a property with a stairlift would also have been suitable. He also complains that his name was removed from the application for a time period.
8. Since Mr X made his complaint to the Council and then the Ombudsman his situation has changed. Mr X and his ex-partner now want to be housed separately. His ex-partner has made a homeless application and at the moment Mr X has no housing register application as he has said that social care may make adaptations to his home so he can continue to live there. Mr X has explained that he would prefer to move.
9. In its response to Mr X’s official complaint, the Council said it was at fault, in that Mr X’s name was removed from the housing register application for a short time. When Mr X realised this had happened and told the Council, his name was reinstated. The Council has said as Mr X did not bid on any properties at that time he did not miss out on any offers of housing.
10. Mr X also complains that he was only able to bid for bungalows or ground floor properties. He says this restricted the properties available and meant they did not find a suitable property. I can see from the information sent that an assessment was carried out by an Occupational Therapist (OT) and they recommended a property with less than 3 stairs. There are notes of a telephone conversation between Mr X and OT, which explain that if he does not agree with the recommendations then he can ask for a reassessment. I cannot find fault with the Council for following a professional recommendation on the type of accommodation available. But, if the reassessment changes the recommendation then the Council can update any new housing application from Mr X to show this.
11. Mr X explained on the telephone that although his situation has changed now he still wants his complaint to be investigated. He wants an apology and recognition that he may have been able to move earlier.
12. Mr X explained that he does not like the area he lives in as the neighbours make allegations against him. The Council has previously advised him to report any issues to the Housing Officer or the Police. Mr X is also able to make a new application for rehousing if he decides he would rather move than have the adaptations made to his current property.
13. From the information I have seen, I cannot see any evidence that the fault by the Council, when Mr X was removed from the housing register, meant that he missed offers of housing. While we can never know this for sure, as Mr X did not bid during this time, it seems unlikely. The Council apologised in its response to Mr X’s stage 2 complaint and I consider the apology offered is a reasonable remedy to this part of the complaint. So, there would be no benefit to further investigation.
14. As there was no evidence of fault in the Council following the OT recommendations I would not propose a remedy for this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I have completed my investigation of the complaint. This complaint is upheld, as the Council was at fault. The apology already offered by the Council is sufficient to remedy any personal injustice to Mr X and a service improvement is not required.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman