Summary: Miss X complained about the Council closing her housing applications. We find that the Council failed to provide clear information about the documents she needed to submit to support her applications and then closed them as incomplete without specifying which documents she had not provided. It also wrongly closed her third application as incomplete when she had provided all the necessary documents. This caused Miss X avoidable frustration and inconvenience and delayed her ability to join the housing register. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Miss X.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that the Council closed her housing applications as incomplete, despite providing all the required information. She says the Council failed to specify what information was missing and instead just told her to reapply.
2. Miss X says the Council’s actions have caused her frustration and inconvenience, and she has had to remain living in overcrowded accommodation because her housing application has not been accepted.

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. 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)
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. I have investigated how the Council handled the housing applications Miss X made between February 2024 and November 2024 because the Council’s decisions on those applications were made in the 12 months before Miss X complained to us.
7. I have not investigated Miss X’s earlier applications for the reasons explained in paragraph four of this statement. I consider it would have been reasonable for Miss X to complain to us sooner.
8. I have also not investigated the application Miss X made in June 2025 because it was made after Miss X complained to us.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Miss X and the Council have 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

11. Every local housing authority must publish an allocation 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))
12. Every application made to a local housing authority for an allocation of housing accommodation shall (if made in accordance with the procedural requirements of the authority’s allocation scheme) be considered by the authority. In considering applications, authorities must ascertain:
• if an applicant is eligible for an allocation of accommodation, and
• if he or she qualifies for an allocation of accommodation. (Allocation of accommodation: guidance for local housing authorities in England, paragraph 3.2 and Housing Act 1996, section 166(3))
13. Applicants have the right to request a review of a decision that they are ineligible for an allocation, or that they are not a qualifying person. (Housing Act 1996, section 160ZA(9) and section 166A(9))
14. Paragraph 2.2.3 of the Council’s housing allocation scheme says:

“In addition to the application, the following documents (where available) must be submitted as evidence, via the Scheme website to verify the information provided by the main applicant, plus any other person who might reside with the applicant who might wish to become a joint tenant:

1. Passport, to help determine eligibility to rent social housing in England.
2. A utility or Council Tax bill from the past three months, to help determine eligibility to rent social housing in England.
3. Birth certificate, to help determine qualification to join the Scheme.
4. Details of any relevant unspent convictions, to help determine qualification to join the Scheme.
5. All financial records from the past three months relating to income and savings, to help determine qualification to join the Scheme.
6. All legal records relating to property ownership to help determine qualification to join the Scheme.
7. Any other information that helps to determine eligibility to rent social housing in England, qualification to join the Scheme or making a community contribution.”

Key events

15. Miss X lives in a five-bedroom house with her family. She would like to move out of the house because it is overcrowded. In total, there are six adults and three children living there. 
16. Miss X applied to join the Council’s housing register in February 2024.
17. The application form outlined the required supporting documents, such as proof of identity, address, and financial records. Miss X submitted several documents to support her application.
18. In June 2024, the Council wrote to Miss X to tell her that it had closed her application because it was incomplete. The letter stated that in order to validate and assess her application, all documents listed on the application form had to be submitted. It did not specify which of those documents had not been provided. It advised Miss X to reapply once she had provided all the required documents.
19. Miss X submitted a second application with additional documents in July 2024. However, in September 2024, the Council again rejected it as incomplete, without specifying which documents were missing.
20. Miss X then submitted a third application, which was considered in January 2025. The Council again decided that her application was incomplete. The letter stated that Miss X had no right to request a review and referred her to our office.

Analysis

21. The Council accepts that, before June 2025, it was not adequately warning applicants that their application would be closed if they did not provide all the required documents. It also accepts that it was not providing clear information to applicants about the financial documents it required, or which documents it would accept as proof of address when the applicant was unable to provide a utility bill or council tax bill. For some time, the Council was not providing applicants with clear information about the reason it had decided their application was incomplete, leaving them uncertain about what further evidence they needed to provide.
22. In June 2025, the Council changed its procedures and it no longer closes applications as incomplete when the required documents have not been provided. Instead, it writes to applicants specifying which documents are missing and asking for them to be provided within ten days.
23. In this case, the Council’s decision letters on Miss X’s first two applications did not clearly specify why it considered her applications were incomplete. This was fault. The Council’s records show that it closed her third application because she had not provided a council tax or utility bill as proof of her address, and she had not provided financial records for other members of her family. Miss X was unable to provide a council tax or utility bill, but she did provide other documents as proof of her address, which the Council should have accepted. The allocations scheme does not require applicants to provide the financial records of other family members and so the Council was wrong to decide that her application was incomplete.
24. The Council decided it needed Miss X to provide additional financial evidence for other family members because it had been unable to confirm who was living at her address. It needed this information to determine whether she qualified for an overcrowding award. However, the Council failed to communicate this requirement to Miss X. This was fault.
25. If the Council had clearly informed Miss X of the documents she needed to provide, and the consequences of not providing them, I consider she is more likely to have provided all the required evidence when she applied in February 2024. If her application had been assessed within eight weeks, she is likely to have received a decision by 29 March 2024. Based on the information Miss X has provided about the number of people living in her house, I consider it likely that she qualifies for a Band C award for overcrowding.
26. The Council’s failings in this case have caused Miss X frustration and inconvenience and delayed her ability to join the housing register.

Subsequent events

27. In June 2025, Miss X submitted a fourth housing application. The Council wrote to Miss X requesting proof of identity and address for all household members to assess her eligibility for an overcrowding award. When no response was received by the given deadline, the Council decided that she did not qualify to join the register. Miss X has not requested a review of this decision.
28. The Council says that should Miss X reapply, and it is decided that she qualifies to join the register, it will backdate her registration date to 29 March 2024. However, any award for overcrowding will only apply from the date of the successful assessment.

Back to top

Action

29. The Council has agreed to take the following actions within four weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Miss X for the failings identified in this case. 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 when making the apology.
• Make a payment of £250 to Miss X. This is a symbolic payment to acknowledge the avoidable frustration and inconvenience caused by the Council’s actions.
30. The Council changed its procedures in June 2025. I therefore do not consider any service improvement recommendations are necessary.
31. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

32. I have completed my investigation and uphold Miss X’s complaint. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice. 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