Summary: Miss D complains the Council delayed accepting her onto the housing register. I have found the Council at fault because there were significant delays and poor handling of the case. The Council has agreed to pay Miss D redress.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Miss D) says the Council delayed accepting her onto the housing register in 2025. Miss D also complains the Council has not allowed her an additional bed space on the housing register and that Officers failed to respond to contact.

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 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

4. My investigation covers January 2025 to August 2025. I understand Miss D had disrepair at her social housing property. I have not investigated this matter because the management of social housing properties is considered by the Housing Ombudsman.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Miss D and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. I shared my draft decision with both parties and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

Background

7. In 2024 Miss D asked the Council to consider allowing her to join the housing register and award priority because of her household’s needs, specifically relating to one of her children’s medical needs and a request that the child be provided with their own bedroom. The family (including for children) were in a two bedroom property and Miss D wanted to be able to bid for a four bedroom property. The Council decided the family had no medical priority. Miss D asked the Council to review its decision.

Events I have investigated

8. On 18 January 2025 the Housing, Health and Disability Team (HHD Team) at the Council reassessed Miss D’s case. It considered medical evidence provided by Miss D about one of her children and the impact of overcrowding on the family. The Council awarded 900 points under the ‘high priority’ health and independence category in recognition of the impact of overcrowding on the child having to share a bedroom. The Council wrote to Miss D with its decision explaining the points awarded.
9. The Council says Miss D applied for ‘housing assistance’ on 25 February. This appears to relate to Miss D asking to join the housing register. On 12 March Miss D complained to the Council about the handling of her case. On 25 March the Council responded to the complaint. It said Miss D had applied for ‘housing assistance’ in February and this had been missed due to an administrative error. An Officer would contact Miss D that week. Miss D says no contact was made.
10. On 7 May Miss D asked the Council to escalate her complaint. She reiterated that one of her children required their own room because of medical need. She had applied to the housing register in February 2025, but nothing had been progressed. On 8 May the Council allocated Miss D’s case to an Officer who was instructed to contact Miss D urgently. The Officer made notes on the case, it seems they were unaware Miss D had already been awarded 900 health and independence points in January. During May Miss D sent the Officer additional medical evidence.
11. On 27 May the Council issued its final stage complaint response. It accepted Miss D had made calls to the Council in January and February that had not been returned and it apologised. It explained that Miss D had been assessed as lacking one bedroom under the Council’s allocations policy. The Council would obtain medical evidence from Miss D to determine if it needed to reassess the case.
12. On 8 July Miss D called the Officer requesting the Council look at the medical information provided. The Officer said the case would be discussed with the medical assessor. Miss D asked for an update on 14 July, and the Officer said they were scheduled to speak to the medical assessor later that day and would then update Miss D. On 17 July the Council received a housing register form from Miss D. On 18 July the Council recorded that it had considered the documents provided by Miss D. The HHD Team Manager had agreed the family should be awarded 900 health and independence points in recognition of the child having to share a bedroom (there was no reference to these points having already been awarded in January). The request for an additional bedspace was also considered and the Council concluded it was still reasonable to allow the family a three bedroom property.
13. On 8 August the Council accepted Miss D onto its housing register and sent her a decision letter advising she could now bid for advertised social housing properties. She had 900 points and was eligible for a three bedroom property. Her priority date on the housing register was 18 January 2025.

What should have happened

14. If a person applies to join the Council’s housing register on the basis that their current accommodation is adversely impacting on the health of a household member, the Council will first request the applicant submit a medical form and supporting medical evidence. This is then assessed by the HHD Team who consider if there is evidence of the current accommodation adversely impacting on a household member’s health. 900 points can be awarded for a person classed as having ‘high priority’ for health and independence points where the Council is satisfied there is sufficient professional evidence to support the case.
15. The HHD Team can also assess the household’s bedroom entitlement. This is assessed using the allocations policy which details how many bedrooms a household are entitled to. This means a family with four children may be assessed as requiring a three bedroom home. If an applicant has specified they need an additional bed space the HHD Team should consider if there are grounds to exercise discretion and allow an extra bedroom. The Council can allow an extra bed space where there is clear evidence from a specialist service of the need for an extra room because siblings cannot reasonably share a bedroom on medical grounds.
16. The outcome of the assessment is documented by the HHD Team and a decision letter issued to the applicant. If the Council finds no points should be awarded and no additional bed space is needed the applicant can request the Council review its decision. However, if the assessment awards points the applicant is then eligible to be considered to join the housing register. The Council should send the applicant a housing register form to complete and return with the required verification documents. Once the Council completes this process, and if the applicant is accepted, the applicant is added onto the housing register and notified. They are then able to bid for advertised social housing properties.

Was there fault by the Council

17. There was significant delay by the Council. It awarded Miss D 900 points in January 2025, that should have meant Miss D was then assessed to see if she was eligible to join the housing register. However I cannot see any evidence of the Council taking this action at the time despite Miss D making a formal complaint. Instead it took until 8 August for the Council to accept Miss D onto the housing register. If the correct process had been followed Miss D could and should have been on the housing register by mid-February at the latest. That is a delay of six months.
18. The Council has accepted that Officers failed to return some calls from Miss D in January and February 2025. I have also found the Council failed to follow though on its promise in the March complaint response to contact Miss D. Miss D had intermittent contact with Officers for the rest of the period, but I cannot see that she received a clear explanation about the process or why she had not been assessed to join the housing register.
19. Miss D wants the Council to allow her an additional bed space. I have not found fault in this matter. The evidence shows me the Council took account of the evidence provided by Miss D in its January and July assessments and set out the reasons for how a decision was reached in its notes. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong. That applies to this matter because the evidence shows the Council followed the correct process.

Did the fault cause an injustice

20. I have considered whether Miss D lost an opportunity to successfully bid for a property during the period of delay from February to early August 2025. I have seen the results for three bedroom properties advertised and allocated during that period. There was one three bedroom property which the Council accepts Miss D may have been shortlisted for but would not have received an offer because the successful applicant had a higher level of health and independence points. This means that Miss D did not miss out on successfully securing a social housing property during the period of delay.
21. The faults by the Council meant Miss D received a poor level of service and was subject to avoidable time and trouble.

Back to top

Action

22. The Council has agreed with my recommendations and will pay Miss D £250 for her time and trouble.
23. The Council will also remind Officers about responding to contact from clients.
24. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions within four weeks of this case closing.

Back to top

Decision

25. I find fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman