Summary: Ms X complained about the way the Council handled her housing application. We find that the Council and Green Square Accord failed to tell Ms X that it was waiting for her to provide information, which led to her missing out on the offer of a property. When Green Square Accord later considered her application, it failed to follow a fair and transparent process which caused Ms X unnecessary distress. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Ms X. It has also agreed to make service improvements.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of her housing application. She says that despite being in the top bidding position for a property she had bid on, it was offered to someone else.
2. Ms X says this is unfair and as a result of the Council’s actions, she remains living in unsuitable accommodation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(1)(A) and 25(7), as amended). This includes complaints about the actions of a registered housing provider where it is a partner to a Council’s Allocation Scheme.
4. 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)
5. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
6. 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

7. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Ms X, the Council and Green Square Accord had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Housing Allocations

9. The Council’s Allocation Scheme describes the criteria that the Council will use to prioritise applications for homes owned by the Council and homes offered to the Council by registered providers through nomination agreements.
10. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme. Once a housing applicant has been accepted on to the housing register, they can bid on properties advertised by the Council.
11. Applicants are placed in a priority band from Band A (highest priority) to Band D (lowest priority). Band A includes applicants who are owed the main housing duty. If they refuse a suitable offer of accommodation, they are placed in Band D.
12. After each bidding cycle closes, a shortlist of applicants who have bid for each property will be completed. The highest bidder is made a provisional offer and invited to view the property. Whilst the offer is under consideration, no further offers should be made.

Nomination agreement

13. Green Square Accord is a registered provider of social housing. It has an agreement with the Council to make housing stock available for nomination.
14. The Council provides the registered provider with a shortlist of nominees who are in the greatest housing need based on the Allocation Scheme.
15. The nomination agreement states that registered providers shall only refuse a nomination in specific circumstances.

Background and key events

16. The Council has owed Ms X the main housing duty for around five years. During this time, she has been living in temporary accommodation and actively bidding on properties advertised by the Council.
17. On 7 May 2024, Ms X received a letter from the Council informing her that she had been shortlisted for a property she had bid on. The letter explained that the housing provider, Green Square Accord (GSA), would contact her to arrange a viewing.
18. Ms X called the Council on 9 May because she had not been contacted about a viewing. She also called GSA but was unable to get any information. The Council advised Ms X to wait until she was contacted by GSA.
19. On 13 May, Ms X called the Council again and was told its records showed that she had failed to attend the viewing. She then contacted GSA, who advised that it had emailed her on 8 May, requesting various documents be submitted by 8am on 13 May. Ms X said she had not received the email and so GSA re-sent it to her. She says she was told to provide the documents and that her application would then be submitted to GSA’s Allocations Panel for approval.
20. Ms X provided the documents over the next few days. On 16 May, GSA confirmed receipt and stated that her application would be submitted to the Allocations Panel for approval later that day. However, the following week, GSA told Ms X that it had offered the property to another applicant.
21. Ms X complained to the Council that she had not been offered the property. In the Council’s response, it explained that although Ms X had missed the original deadline, GSA had agreed to consider her application on a first-come, first-served basis. However, by the time Ms X submitted her documents, GSA had already considered and approved another applicant. The Council considered there had been no fault on its part.
22. The Council has confirmed that Ms X’s housing priority has not been affected, and she remains in Band A.
23. Ms X has recently been shortlisted for another property. She says she has been told the property will be offered to her if she can provide evidence to show she has cleared her rent arrears.

Analysis

24. The Council has confirmed that Ms X did not fail to attend the viewing but rather missed the document submission deadline. It has explained that officers must select refusal reasons from a pre-populated list and in this case, the option “Did not attend letting” was the most relevant choice available. I consider officers should have the ability to enter an accurate reason. As a result of the officer being unable to select an accurate reason, Ms X was incorrectly informed that she was not offered the property because she failed to attend the viewing. This would have caused Ms X unnecessary distress and confusion.
25. The evidence shows that GSA did send an email to Ms X on 8 May, requesting various documents be submitted by 8am on 13 May. In one of the letters Ms X subsequently sent to the Council about her complaint, she said that she missed the email because she did not realise it was from the Housing Provider. I am satisfied that the email was sent to Ms X.
26. When the Council wrote to Ms X on 7 May, it told her that she would be contacted by GSA. The email sent the following day was from a GSA email address, and the subject line referenced the address of the property in question. Given this, I do not consider Ms X not seeing the email on 8 May can be attributed to any fault by the Council or GSA.
27. However, the Council and GSA failed to tell Ms X about the email when she called on 9 May trying to find out why she had not been contacted about a viewing. Had they done so, Ms X would likely have submitted the documents in time, and she would have been offered the property.
28. When Ms X spoke to GSA on 13 May, she was not told that it was too late for her to be considered for the property. Instead, she was told that her application would still be considered if she submitted the necessary documents. Ms X disputes that she was told that another applicant had been contacted, and the applications would be processed on a first-come, first-served basis. If GSA was considering the other application at that time, it would have approved it immediately, considering it already had that applicant’s documents. Also, the wording of the email GSA sent to Ms X on 16 May after she had submitted her documents suggests that it had not already approved another applicant at that time. On the balance of probabilities, I do not consider the applications were considered and approved on a first-come, first-served basis. Moreover, the allocation process for this property appears to have been neither fair nor transparent. As GSA had agreed to consider Ms X’s application, it should not have offered it to someone else. The failings identified here caused Ms X significant distress.

Back to top

Action

29. When a council commissions or arranges for another organisation to provide services, we treat actions taken by or on behalf of that organisation as actions taken on behalf of the council and in the exercise of the council’s functions. Where we find fault with the actions of the service provider, we can make recommendations to the council alone. Here we found fault with the actions of the housing provider and made recommendations to the Council.
30. The Council has agreed to take the following actions within four weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Ms X for the failings identified in this case. The apology should be made in accordance with our guidance on remedies.
• Make a payment of £800 to Ms X. This is a symbolic payment to recognise that she has been living in overcrowded accommodation for eight months longer than necessary.
• Make a payment of £250 to Ms X. This is a symbolic payment to recognise the significant distress she experienced due to the failings identified in this case.
31. The Council has agreed to take the following actions within eight weeks of my final decision:
• Ensure officers can record the actual reason an applicant has not been offered a property, and not just one from a pre-populated list.
• Ensure GSA is aware that if it is considering an application from a Council nominated applicant, it must allocate the property in accordance with the nominations agreement.
• Asks GSA to keep a record of all telephone contact with nominated housing applicants.
• Consider improving its systems to allow better information sharing between Registered Providers and the Council.
32. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

33. I have completed my investigation and uphold Ms X’s complaint. There was fault which caused injustice to Ms X. The action the Council has agreed to take is sufficient to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman