Summary: Miss D complained there was an error on her housing bidding account which meant she was removed from the housing register and had to make a new application. Miss D says this has significantly impacted her mental health and ability to work. Miss D also says it has affected the mental health of her children. We find the Council at fault for failing to inform Miss D it had closed her bidding account. This caused Miss D frustration and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Miss D to remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified.

The complaint

1. Miss D complained there was an error on her housing bidding account which meant she was removed from the housing register and had to make a new application. She also complained the Council’s handling of her complaint was poor. Miss D says, because of the error, her priority allocation has been impacted, and three years of bidding has been removed from her application. Miss D says this has impacted both her own, and her children’s mental health. Miss D says her son has high care needs and his anxiety has heightened because of the fault and her daughter’s development has been impacted. Miss D would like the Council to provide a one-time offer of suitable accommodation for her family or backdate her current priority to 2019.

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. I considered evidence provided by Miss D and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Miss D 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

Legal and administrative background

6. 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))
7. The Council’s allocations scheme sets out how the Council determines the applicant’s position within their band. The scheme sets out that waiting time determines the applicant’s position within a band. It begins from the date that the current banding priority was awarded. This is called the effective date.
8. If an applicants circumstances change and they either:
• Require a larger or smaller property, or;
• There is an increase or decrease in the banding priority

The effective date will be the date when the Council became aware of the new circumstances.

The council complaints procedure

9. The Council’s published complaints procedure sets out a one stage process. It says the Council should acknowledge complaints within three working days and provide a response within 20 working days. If the complainant remains dissatisfied, they can complain to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.

What happened

10. In November 2019 Miss D submitted a homelessness application and the Council accepted the main housing duty. As part of the Council’s duty, Miss D was added to the Council’s housing register and was able to bid on properties.
11. The Council provided Miss D with suitable, long term accommodation in March 2020. This ended the Council’s main housing duty. Miss D should have been removed from the housing register at this stage however, due to an error, Miss D’s bidding account remained active.
12. In February 2022 Miss D provided the Council with medical evidence to update her housing register account. The Council assessed this information and wrote to Miss D to tell her she was now priority band 1T and eligible to bid on 3 bedroom properties.
13. In July 2023 Miss D contacted the Council as she was unable to access her bidding account, and the online portal was advising her she needed to submit a new application. The Council responded to Miss D three days later and explained the Council’s housing duty ended when she moved into her current property, meaning she was not eligible to bid. The Council told Miss D her bidding account had remained open in error and her account had been closed once the error was identified. Miss D was advised to submit a new housing register application to allow the Council to assess her current need in accordance with the allocation scheme.
14. Miss D submitted a new application, along with supporting medical evidence. The Council assessed Miss D’s application and awarded her priority band 1T for bidding on 3 bedroom properties. This was awarded on medical grounds. The Council initially backdated this to the date of Miss D’s application. Following Miss D’s complaint to the Ombudsman, the Council has backdated Miss D’s application to February 2022, the date Miss D originally provided the Council with medical evidence.
15. In May 2024 Miss D emailed the Council to complain. Miss D received an email response in July 2024 however this was not a formal complaint response. Miss D did not receive a formal response to her complaint until September 2024.

My findings

16. Miss D’s bidding account should have been closed in March 2020 when the Council secured her suitable, long term accommodation. The Council failed to correctly close Miss D’s bidding account due to admin errors. This is fault but I do not consider this fault caused Miss D any injustice as the accommodation she was in was considered suitable at the time.
17. In 2022, the Council realised the error and closed Miss D’s bidding account however it failed to make Miss D aware it had closed the account or explain why. This is fault which caused Miss D distress and frustration.
18. The Council completed an assessment of Miss D’s new application, and it has been backdated to February 2022, the date on which the Council first became aware of Miss D’s new circumstances. This is in line with the Council’s allocations scheme. There is no evidence of fault in Miss D’s current banding or effective date.
19. The Council failed to follow its complaint process when Miss D submitted her complaint in May 2024. This is fault which caused a delay in Miss D receiving a response and caused uncertainty and frustration.

Back to top

Action

20. Within one month of the final decision the Council will:
• Apologise to Miss D for the faults identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology.
• Make a symbolic payment of £250 to Miss D in recognition of the distress, uncertainty and frustration caused by the Council’s failure to inform Miss D her bidding account had been closed and its failure to follow its complaint procedure.
21. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

22. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman