Summary: We found no fault on Miss Y’s complaint about the Council preventing her from bidding on suitable properties. There was fault on her complaint about it failing to consider whether it needed to assess whether she was homeless because it was unreasonable to expect her to continue living in her home. The Council agreed to send a written apology, pay £400 for the injustice caused, remind relevant officers of the duties owed to those who may be homeless, and consider whether it owes her a homeless duty. It also agreed to check whether she needs help bidding and contact her about the key safe and pendant alarm.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complained about the Council failing to:
1. allow her to bid, under its choice based letting scheme, for suitable properties in category C or D; and
2. consider whether it needed to assess whether she was homeless because it was unreasonable to expect her to live in her current home.
2. As a result, she can only bid for lower category properties which means she remains in accommodation that does not meet her needs and is affecting her health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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)
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. 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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. I investigated Miss Y’s complaint:

• from February 2024: This was because her complaint to us was received in February 2025. The law says we cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. I have seen no good reason why I should exercise discretion to investigate any earlier complaint.
• to February 2025: Usually, I would investigate to the date the Council sent its final stage response under its complaints procedure which also directs a complainant to us if they remain dissatisfied. On Miss Y’s complaint, the Council’s response directed her to the Housing Ombudsman instead.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Miss Y, the notes I made of our telephone conversations, the Council’s response to my enquiries, as well as relevant law, policy, and guidance. I sent a copy of my draft decision to Miss Y and the Council. I considered their responses.

Back to top

What I found

Council housing allocation scheme

8. Most properties are let through choice based lettings and are advertised.
9. The Council has an Accessible Housing Register which places accommodation into one of several categories. This helps disabled people make more informed choices when bidding for accommodation.
10. These properties range from: Category A (designed for wheelchair); Category B (wheelchair accessible essential rooms); Category C (those which meet the main feature of a level approach to the property and wider doorways and corridors); Category D (easy access accommodation); Category E (step free accommodation with E+ having up to four steps to the home); Category F (general housing).
11. Applicants have a statutory right to request a review of any decision about the facts of their case which is likely to be, or has been, taken into account when considering whether the allocate housing accommodation to them. This includes a decision not to make an allocation.

Homeless law and guidance

12. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or, if they have accommodation, it is not reasonable for them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
13. If someone contacts a council seeking accommodation or help to obtain accommodation and gives ‘reason to believe’ they ‘may be’ homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, the council has a duty to make inquiries into what, if any, further duty it owes them. The threshold for triggering the duty to make inquiries is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular department of the council. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance (the Code) paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)
14. A council must secure interim accommodation for an applicant and their household if it has reason to believe the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance, and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
15. Examples of applicants in priority need are:

• people with dependent children;
• pregnant women;
• people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems, disability, or old age;
• care leavers; and
• victims of domestic abuse.

What happened

16. Miss Y joined the housing register in 2014. She has various health problems, which means she can fall at any time. She rented a one bedroom ground flat from a housing association. This was in a house she found difficult to access. This was partly because of the shared narrow hallway and obstacles in it like utility boxes. She also said the shower had a bath which was unsuitable due to her medical condition, and adaptations recommended by the occupational therapist, such as handrails in the bathroom, were not done.
17. In 2020, she started bidding for accommodation under its choice based letting scheme. When she bid, she said the Council told her those she chose were not in the correct category of accommodation for her. She bid on category E/F accommodation when she should be bidding for C/D accommodation.
18. She told the Council this was because she could not see C/D accommodation when she logged on to its system to bid. It had no evidence of her sending screenshots, or other evidence, to support her claim she could not see C/D properties. I have seen a record of the Council asking her to send such evidence.
19. The Council agreed to send her emails when suitable accommodation became available. It could not confirm whether emails were sent to her because the manager responsible left. Miss Y said it only told her of three properties, none of which were suitable. The Council agreed to try this again and call her about advertised properties.
20. In July 2024, Miss Y bid for a property but it was bypassed as it was E+ which did not meet her assessed medical needs.
21. In August, an occupational therapist assessed Miss Y at home. It recorded she:

• struggled with a low toilet. Equipment was needed;
• could not get in and out of the bath. Guidelines said it was unsuitable for someone with her condition;
• may need a wheelchair in the future and had been brought home in one from hospital during times when she had been admitted. The accommodation was unsuitable for wheelchair use; and
• needed: a level access entry (or lift); a level access shower (or potential to adapt); wheelchair accessible accommodation; a kitchen with space for a perching stool; a wheelchair accessible kitchen and bathroom.

22. The same month, the Council installed an adjustable toilet surround, which was the equivalent to the free standing toilet frame recommended by the occupational therapist.
23. In September, Miss Y complained about the suitability of the property, that adaptations were needed to it, and the problems she continued to face with bidding. The Council told her she could not change her recommended category of accommodation from C/D to E/E+ despite her saying she could manage a few stairs. This was because of the occupational therapist report.
24. Miss Y visited the Council’s offices but provided officers with no evidence of her limited viewing problems when bidding. When she visited, there were no advertised C/D properties that week. A referral for a ‘key safe’ and pendant alarm were made but the Council accepted there was nothing to show they were completed.
25. The Council confirmed grab rails outside the house were already in place by the front door and internal grab rails were not feasible due to the narrowness of the hall. While the bath lift was in place, it was not suitable because of Miss Y’s health. A Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) was approved for a level access shower. A DFG is a grant provided by local councils to help people with disabilities who need to make adaptations to their home.
26. In October, the Council responded to her complaint about not being able to bid for C/D accommodation. It confirmed its bidding system showed all available properties unless an applicant had an A or B priority. This meant all category properties from C-F were shown on the bidding system. It noted she only bid for a one bedroom property in July. The Council investigated her reports about viewings on the bidding system but found no technical problems which prevented her from seeing C/D properties.
27. In a separate email, the Council also explained it was unlikely the properties she wanted to bid on were available every week. This could explain why she was not seeing them all. It told her while it understood why she wanted temporary accommodation, this was ‘not a facility that the council’s Lettings Agency can provide’. It encouraged her to liaise with her landlord who might help. Otherwise, she could apply to its Homeless Prevention and Advice Service who might be able to arrange temporary accommodation.
28. The same month, the Council closed her DFG funding application because Miss Y failed to provide the benefit documentation needed.
29. The Council received no other bids from Miss Y, apart from in July 2024, despite 27 one bedroom C/D properties becoming available.
30. It confirmed the current accommodation was ‘not ideal’ for her health. It had not considered whether she was homeless and said if she felt it was unreasonable to occupy it, a referral to the homeless service could be made for an assessment.

My findings

Complaint a): bidding

31. I found no fault on this complaint. This was because there was no evidence of the Council preventing Miss Y in any way from bidding for category C/D accommodation. The Council investigated her reports but found no problems. It had also explained C/D properties did not become available every week.

Complaint b): homelessness

32. I found fault on this complaint. In reaching this view, I took the following into account:
1. Miss Y was in a housing association property. She was also on the Council’s housing register as she wanted to move to a more suitable property.
2. Miss Y’s housing needs were assessed by an occupational therapist in August 2024. This found the bath unsuitable for her, the toilet height was too low, and there was not enough space to turn her wheelchair into the flat door or down a narrow corridor. It confirmed the flat was not suitable for wheelchair use and there was ‘no potential to adapt the narrow communal hall way as it is used by other tenant’. She needed a level access entrance, or a lift, and wheelchair accessibility.
3. I consider the Council, when presented with this information, as well as the information Miss Y sent, should have looked at whether it had ‘reason to believe’ she may be homeless. This was a low threshold to meet under the Code.
4. The Council needed to consider whether it was reasonable for Miss Y to continue to occupy her home. There is no simple test of reasonableness. It was for the Council to judge on the facts of each case, taking into account Miss Y’s circumstances. This would involve looking at the accommodation’s physical characteristics (paragraph 6.39 the Code). It had to consider if these were unsuitable for her because, for example, the highlighted need for wheelchair access which was restricted in her home.
5. Miss Y did not need to make a formal application for the Council to consider whether it owed her a homeless duty. An application for homelessness can be made to any department at a council (paragraph 18.5, the Code) and expressed in any form. It does not need to say they are looking for help as homeless. The key for an application was for there to be communication about seeking accommodation, or help, along with details which gave the council reason to believe she might be homeless.
6. Councils need to take care to identify cases where information on an enquiry about a social housing allocation scheme, or an application for an allocation of housing, gives reason to believe the applicant might be homeless. This should be seen as an application for homelessness assistance. (paragraph 18.6, the Code) The duty to make inquiries arose as soon as the Council had reason to believe she might be homeless. It was also fault to signpost her to another department should she want the Council to consider such an application.
7. While I cannot say whether the Council would have decided she was homeless, I can say it failed to make inquiries, consider, assess, and reach a decision on whether she was homeless and eligible for temporary accommodation. It failed to give her its decision and explain her rights of appeal against it.
8. The response she received about temporary accommodation was a decision which carried a right of review. She was not told she had this right.
9. I am satisfied these failures caused Miss Y an injustice. She lost the opportunity to have her situation properly considered under homelessness law and has the uncertainty of not knowing what the outcome might have been had it been done. She lost review rights as well. I took account of the help given to apply for DFG funding for the installation of a level access shower and Miss Y’s failure to provide the required documents for this to be progressed. Even taking this into account, major problems with her home would have remained as it was unsuitable for wheelchair access as outlined by the occupational therapist.
10. The Council was unable to show it took the action it told Miss Y it would take to help her with bidding for appropriate accommodation.
11. When considering the injustice this caused her, I took account of the raised expectations she had, the uncertainty of not knowing whether the lack of contact was due to a lack of accommodation or a failure to do what it said it would, along with a sense of frustration. I also took account of Miss Y saying it had told her about three properties, which means some action must have been taken, even for a short time. There was a lost opportunity for relevant properties to be brought to her attention.
12. I also found fault with the Council’s failure to show it arranged for a key safe and pendant alarm. I consider this caused some injustice to Miss Y. It caused her uncertainty and a lost opportunity to have these available to her.

Back to top

Action

33. I considered our guidance on remedies.
34. The Council agreed to take the following action within four weeks of the final decision on this complaint:
1. Send Miss Y a written apology for the injustice the following failures caused: failing to consider, assess, and decide whether it had reason to believe she may be homeless; failing to show it provided the help it offered her when looking to bid; failing to show it installed the key safe and pendant alarm.
2. Pay £400 to Miss Y for the injustice caused,
3. Remind relevant officers of the low threshold giving rise to the duty to make inquiries and what, if any, duty a person is owed where there is reason to believe they might be homeless or threatened with homelessness.
4. Remind relevant officers they should accept the relevant duty as soon as they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness.
5. Remind relevant officers of the need to tell applicants of the decision about what, if any, homeless duty is owed along with information about review rights.
6. Consider whether it owes Miss Y any homeless duty taking into account all the available evidence as well as her circumstances and notify her of its decision.
7. Contact Miss Y to see whether she still needs help with checking for suitable accommodation to bid for and explain i) how this will work and ii) the period covered over which it agrees to do this.
8. Contact Miss Y about the key safe and pendant alarm and arrange for their provision if they were not provided.
35. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

36. I found the following on Miss Y’s complaint against the Council:

• Complaint a): no fault; and
• Complaint b): fault causing injustice.

37. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman