Summary: The Council failed to consider all of Mr X’s housing needs when deciding what priority he should have on its social housing register. It also failed to tell Mr X of his right to request a review of the Council’s decision. This meant the Council placed him in the wrong priority band for 15 months. The Council also did not give Mr X enough notice to place a bid on a potential property. This caused Mr X distress and frustration. The Council has agreed it will make Mr X a direct offer on the next suitable property and apologises to him. The Council will also make service improvements to prevent a recurrence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s actions in relation to his housing matter. He said the Council:
• placed him in the wrong band when he applied to the Council’s social housing scheme;
• advertised a potential suitable property which was not vacant; and
• did not give him proper notice to place a bid on another potential suitable property.
2. Mr X said this caused him distress and frustration and it negatively affected his health. He wants the Council to give him a house which is suitable to his needs.

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. 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.
5. 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

6. 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)
7. I have exercised discretion to investigate Mr X’s complaint from July 2023. This is because Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to place him in band D in July 2023 and any injustice has been continuous since that date until the Council reviewed his banding in September 2024.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I spoke with Mr X and considered information he provided.
9. I considered information provided by the Council.
10. Mr X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft version of this decision. I considered their comments before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Housing Act 1996

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.
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; and
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others.

The Council’s housing allocations policy

13. The Council will assess an application and place the applicant in one of the following bands:
• band A: applicants with an urgent need to move;
• band B: applicants with a very high need to move;
• band C: applicants with a high need to move;
• band D: applicants with an identified housing need; or
• band E: applicants without an identified housing need but are either over 60 years of age and/or are social housing tenants who are living in the council area who are adequately house but require a transfer.
14. The Council will give applicants a priority date which identifies priority within the bands. Initially, the priority date will be the date of the application however, if an applicant’s circumstances change which results in a change of band, it may affect their priority date.
15. The Council considers the individual circumstances of an applicant’s needs when deciding what priority they should have. This includes:
• medical grounds where an applicant has a medical condition or a disability that is affected by their housing circumstances; or
• social and welfare needs where an applicant has an identified housing need which is not addressed in the banding assessment criteria.
16. If the Council determines an applicant has two reasons to be in the same band where at least one is a medical need or overcrowding housing, it will give the applicant a composite need and move them to the next band up.
17. Applicants can request a review of decisions made by the Council such as:
• the facts of their case which have been or are likely to be taken into account when considering whether to make a nomination; or
• any decision not to give them any preference under the nomination scheme.

The Council’s complaints policy

18. The Council has a two-stage complaints process. In its response, the Council says it will:
• outline the investigation methods;
• make findings on each aspect of the complaint e.g. upheld, not upheld, partially upheld or no conclusion;
• outline any remedial action; and
• inform the complainant on how to escalate their complaint to stage two of its process or to the Ombudsman if it has exhausted its complaints process.

Background

19. Mr X lives with a relative in a two-bedroom property with a level access shower. Towards the end of 2022, Mr X applied to the Council’s housing register. In his application, Mr X said he:
• had physical health needs;
• was living with a mental condition;
• had a car;
• had applied to the Council’s housing register due to personal circumstances and his health problems. He said he wanted to have a stable home of his own; and
• required a ground floor property with a level access shower.
20. The Council said Mr X also required accessible parking for his car.
21. The Council assessed Mr X’s application. In July 2023, the Council wrote to Mr X and said his application was active for him to place bids on suitable properties. It said it had placed Mr X in band D with a medical need. The Council did not inform Mr X of his right to request a review of its decision, if he was unhappy.

What happened

22. In December 2023, the Council had advertised a property, property A, which was a ground floor flat. Mr X placed a bid on the property however in early January 2024, the independent housing association managing the property told the Council it was no longer available as the current tenant had decided to stay. The Council informed Mr X of the change of circumstances.
23. In April 2024, the Council had advertised another property, property B, which was a ground floor flat with no parking. Despite no available parking, Mr X was interested in the property and visited the property in May 2024. He asked the independent housing association managing the property about potential parking at the property to which it responded there was no available parking for council tenants. Mr X placed a bid following his visit. The Council short-listed Mr X and two other applicants who were also interested in the property.
24. Following his visit, the Council emailed Mr X and asked him if he wanted to accept the property and advised him to contact the Occupational Team and Highways Team to request if a disabled parking bay could be put in place. It said it was not certain on how long the process would take and although it would not alleviate the issue of parking in the short term, he may still want to consider the property. The Council asked Mr X to let it know whether he would like the property within two hours.
25. Mr X did not see the Council’s email until a few days later. He emailed the Council and said he wanted to take the property if the Council could support him with the issue of parking. The Council responded to Mr X and said it had now offered the property to another applicant.
26. In mid-May 2024, Mr X complained to the Council. As part of his complaint, Mr X said the Council:
• unexpectedly withdrawing property A had negatively affected his mental health. Mr X had been looking forward to moving into the property. He was unhappy the Council had advertised a property which was not available; and
• had not given him enough notice to consider property B before it had offered it to another applicant. Mr X said the Council should have phoned him as well as sending an email. Mr X was unhappy with how the Council Officer had communicated with him in relation to this property and on other occasions. He also said the Officer did not understand his needs in relation to his disability.
27. The Council investigated Mr X’s complaint and produced a report, “the housing services investigation and recommendations”. The report:
• provided a background of Mr X’s housing matter. It also said although Mr X lived with his relative, his relative did not welcome him due to his sexuality;
• provided a chronology of what had happened in relation to property A and B;
• suggested Mr X speak to the independent housing association about its practice of advertising properties where the tenant had not yet moved out and may cancel their notice; and
• suggested addressing the Council Officer’s behaviour with their manager to highlight any training needs to prevent a recurrence of fault.
28. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s response and asked it to investigate his complaint further.
29. The Council investigated Mr X’s complaint at stage two and said it:
• recognised it had given insufficient time to Mr X to consider property B. It apologised to Mr X. It said its officers should consider the needs and wishes of applicants;
• the Officer who had communicated with Mr X in relation to property B would attend training; and
• where parking may be an issue, it would clarify this before advertising properties and make this clear in the adverts.
30. In August 2024, Mr X contacted the Council and said he was not sure why the Council had placed him in band D and believed it should have placed him in band C. Mr X asked the Council to review his banding. In support of this, he submitted information to the Council in relation to benefits he was in receipt of. The Council responded to Mr X and said it would review his banding within eight weeks.
31. The Council reviewed Mr X’s banding and in September 2024, it wrote to Mr X and said it had considered:
• his current accommodation;
• his medical needs and supporting evidence Mr X had provided to the Council before it had decided his banding in June 2023;
• recent information in relation to Mr X’s benefits;
• the Council’s housing services investigation and recommendations report; and
• the Public Sector Equalities Duty and the Equalities Act 2010.
32. The Council said Mr X had two reasons to be in the same band, one of which was a medical need and other a social/welfare need as he was living with a relative who did not agree with his sexuality. The Council said it accepted Mr X had a protected characteristic. As a result, the Council gave Mr X a composite need and moved him up to band C.
33. The Council said it would amend Mr X’s application and the new band would apply from his current priority date which was July 2023 as it recognised Mr X had provided information in relation to his social/welfare need at the time of his initial application.
34. Mr X complained to the Council again and as part of his complaint, he said when the Council initially assessed his application and placed him in band D, it had not:
• made him aware of how he was able to request a review; and
• considered his circumstances in relation to living with his relative.
35. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint and said it:
• accepted it had not made Mr X aware of his right to request a review of its decision in its decision letter of July 2023; and
• was aware Mr X had informed the Council in June 2023 that living with his relative was having a negative impact on his social and welfare needs as they did not agree with his sexuality.
36. The Council apologised to Mr X and offered him financial help of up to £800 towards moving costs when he was able to secure suitable accommodation. The Council also said it would allocate an officer to help him move his belongings.
37. Mr X then complained to us.
38. In response to my enquiries, the Council:
• said at the time it had sent Mr X its initial decision letter informing him of his banding, the letter template did not include information about how to request a review of its decision. The Council said it had amended this in mid-2024 so the decision letter now informs applicants on how to request a review;
• accepted it had made an error by initially placing Mr X in band D as it did not consider his social/welfare needs. The Council said it should have recognised this when it investigated Mr X’s complaint at stage one of its process;
• provided its advert for property A which showed it was available in December 2023. The Council said it recognised Mr X may have been disappointed with it suddenly withdrawing this property however, the current tenant had decided to stay; and
• provided a list of properties which were available between July 2023 and September 2024 which may have been suitable for Mr X if it had initially placed him in band C. However, the Council added it understood Mr X required a ground floor flat with a level access shower and accessible parking. He also wanted to the property in specific areas of the council area. The Council said only some of the properties available to band C between July 2023 and September 2024 were situated in Mr X’s preferred choice of areas and the Council could not confirm whether they had accessible parking.

Back to top

Findings

39. The Council initially placed Mr X in band D in July 2023, based on his medical needs only. The Council said it was aware at the time that Mr X had social/welfare needs however it failed to consider this when it decided his banding. This was fault.
40. The Council then failed to inform Mr X his right to request a review when it wrote to him informing him of its decision to place him in band D. This was fault. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s decision and was unable to request a review at the time. The Council has accepted it was at fault and has amended its decision letter so applicants are aware they have the right to request a review. This was appropriate to prevent the fault happening again.
41. The Council was reminded that Mr X had social/welfare needs when it investigated his complaint under its stage one procedure in May 2024. However, it still did not consider reviewing his banding. This was fault. The Council only reviewed Mr X’s banding when he requested it to do so in August 2024 and as a result, changed it to band C in September 2024, considering his social/welfare needs. The faults set out in paragraphs 39 to 41 meant Mr X was in the wrong band for 15 months.
42. The Council referred to a list of available properties between July 2023 and September 2024 which may have been suitable for Mr X and which he could have bid on successfully if he was in band C. The Council said they were not all situated in Mr X’s preferred areas and the Council could not confirm whether they had accessible parking. However, on balance, the properties could have been suitable for Mr X which meant he could have moved to into suitable accommodation then.
43. The Council did not give Mr X enough notice to accept property B. This was fault. The Council accepted it was at fault and said it addressed the matter with the Officer who did not give Mr X enough notice. It said it would also make adverts clear where parking may be an issue. This was appropriate to stop the fault happening in future.
44. The above faults caused Mr X distress and frustration. The Council has apologised to Mr X for these faults and has offered him financial help with moving once he secures a suitable property of up to £800 and an officer to help him move. This was appropriate. However, I have made a further recommendation to remedy the injustice caused.
45. The Council investigated Mr X’s initial complaint and provided him with a response in the form of a report in May 2024. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s initial response and so asked it to investigate his complaint further. I have reviewed the stage one response and it was not clear on whether it upheld Mr X’s complaints and it was not clear on what remedial action the Council would take to remedy the injustice caused to Mr X and to prevent a recurrence of fault. This was fault and caused Mr X frustration.
46. Mr X complained the Council had advertised property A which was not available. I will not make a finding of fault as the Council had advertised the property based on information it had at the time which was the current tenant was due to move out. The tenant decided to stay which the Council was not able to forecast beforehand.

Back to top

Agreed Actions

47. Within one month of the final decision, the Council will apologise to Mr X for not providing him with a thorough stage one response and in line with its policy. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council will consider this guidance in making the apology.
48. Within three months of the final decision, the Council will make Mr X a direct offer on the next property which it deems is suitable to meet Mr X’s needs.
49. Within three months of the final decision, the Council will also:
• review this complaint with staff and remind them the importance of considering all the information and needs of applicants when assessing their housing applications; and
• remind staff to follow its complaints procedure when providing a response so that the response is clear on the outcome of the complaint and any remedial action the Council proposes to take.
50. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final Decision

51. I have now completed my investigation. The Council was at fault. It has agreed to the recommendations to remedy the injustice caused and prevent a recurrence of fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman