Summary: The Council accepted it failed to properly communicate with Miss X and Mr Y about the availability of parking at social housing it offered to Mr Y. This caused Mr Y uncertainty over parking at the property, but I cannot say it resulted in Mr Y accepting a property he would not have done. The Council has apologised and offered Mr Y a financial payment. I am satisfied with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained on behalf of her father, Mr Y. She complained the Council failed to provide Mr Y with parking at a property it allocated him, despite assurances it would. Mr Y has a disability badge and severe mobility problems, and Miss X says he would not have accepted the property had he known it did not come with parking. Miss X says the lack of parking is severely impacting Mr Y’s health. She wants the Council to accept its error and allocate Mr Y a parking space.

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(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.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

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)
6. The Council initially signposted Miss X to the Housing Ombudsman leading to a delay in her complaint to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman. I have decided to investigate Miss X’s complaint from March 2024 as there was a good reason for her delay complaining to us.
7. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
8. The Council is Mr Y’s social housing provider and the allocation of parking spaces at his property comes under its role as Mr Y’s landlord. I cannot investigate the Council’s role in deciding who should be allocated parking at Mr Y’s property or how it handled Mr Y’s application for parking. I have investigated how the Council handled the offer and allocation of Mr Y’s property and the information it provided Mr Y with before he accepted the property.

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, Mr Y and the Council now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and procedures

Housing allocations

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. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
12. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme which enables housing applicants to bid for available properties which it advertises.

The Council’s complaint process

13. The Council operates a two-stage complaint process. It says it will respond to stage one complaints within 10 working days and stage two complaints within 20 working days.

What happened

14. In early 2024 Miss X and Mr Y viewed a property managed by the Council. Miss X says they asked about disabled parking at the viewing and were told there was disabled parking on the ground floor. The property advert contained no reference to parking.
15. Mr Y accepted the property and signed a tenancy agreement on 28 March 2024. The agreement makes no reference to parking. In April 2024 Miss X tried to speak to someone about the parking situation but said they were rude to her and she did not get a satisfactory response. Miss X complained to the Council on 9 April 2024. She said the Council had not provided Mr Y with parking and she the person she had enquired with had been rude.
16. The Council responded on 23 May 2024. It explained there were eight parking spaces at the property, and these were only for the use of disabled residents who met specific criteria. It said while Mr Y may qualify, the bays had already been allocated to residents with the highest need. It said Mr Y would have been told this before accepting the property. It set out its parking priority criteria. The Council apologised if Miss X felt the officer she spoke to had been rude. It offered Miss X £30 for the delay in responding to her complaint.
17. Miss X remained unhappy and escalated her complaint to stage two of the Council’s complaint procedure on 12 July 2024.
18. The Council responded at stage two on 17 September 2024. It explained there was a specific parking policy in place on the estate where Mr Y’s property was. It said that when Mr Y accepted the property its officer said they would inform the Council’s housing service that Mr Y would like a parking space but did not make it clear that a space was not guaranteed and they would only be in touch if the Council allocated Mr Y a space. The Council said its communication had not been clear enough. It said that while Mr Y may have declined the property if the Council had confirmed there was no parking at the sign-up stage, Mr Y had accepted the property without a confirmed space.
19. The Council said Mr Y was on the waiting list for a space at the property and could request disabled on street parking. The Council repeated its apology is Miss X felt an officer was rude, but it did not have a recording to verify this. It offered Miss X £500 for its poor communication and £50 for the delayed stage one and stage two complaint responses.
20. Miss X remained unhappy and complained to the Ombudsman.

My findings

21. Miss X says Mr Y would not have accepted the property if he had known there would not be parking. The property advert and Mr Y’s tenancy agreement contain no reference to parking at the property. There is no evidence of any formal offer of parking as part of the property offer to Mr Y.
22. Miss X says the officer on the day said they would arrange a parking space for Mr Y. The Council has accepted it failed to properly communicate with Miss X and Mr Y about the availability of parking at the property. This was fault and caused Mr Y uncertainty about the availability of the parking. On balance, I cannot say Mr Y would not have accepted the offer had the communication been clearer, given the evidence shows Mr Y accepted the property with no formal guarantee of parking.
23. The Council’s apology and proposed payment of £550 for the poor communication and delay in its complaint handling is in line with our guidance on remedies. It reflects the uncertainty caused by the Council’s fault.

Back to top

Decision

24. I find fault causing injustice which the Council has already remedied.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman