Summary: Miss F complained about the Council’s handling of her housing register application. The Council delayed responding to her request for a reassessment which caused distress. The Council has already apologised for this which remedies the injustice caused. We found no fault in the rest of the complaint.

The complaint

1. Miss F complained about the Council’s handling of her housing register application. In particular, she complained the Council:
1. Failed to properly assess her housing needs, did not adequately consider her health needs or properly consider her risk from domestic abuse and wrongly placed her in Band C.
2. Delayed responding to her request for a review of her banding.
3. Repeatedly refused her bids, relisted properties without explanation and told her she will never be allocated a property while she remains in Band C.
2. Miss F considers there has been discrimination as she is transgender. She says the Council’s actions have caused her significant distress and worsened her depression. She would like to be able to get a council property and have a secure living situation.

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 consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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)
6. 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

7. Miss F says the situation has been ongoing since 2018. I am investigating events since August 2024. This is because Miss F came to us in August 2025. In line with paragraph 5, I consider there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate a late complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Miss F and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Miss F and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

Housing register allocations

10. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises housing register 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))
11. 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;
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others;

(Housing Act 1996, section 166A(3))

12. The Council’s allocations policy has three housing needs bands: Bands A, B and C. Band A contains applications with the highest priority need. Priority within Bands is determined by an applicant’s effective date, which is usually the date the application is received.
13. The allocations policy provides for medical or welfare priority across Bands A, B and C, depending on the severity and urgency of the impact on the applicant. Applicants who need to move because they have been assessed as having a moderate medical or welfare need are placed in Band C. Applications for medical priority will be assessed to determine the extent to which the applicant’s health is affected by their housing conditions and the expected benefits of providing suitable alternative housing. Officers may seek advice from a medical adviser where they consider it necessary to understand the severity or impact of a medical need.
14. Under the allocations policy, domestic abuse is relevant to priority where there is an assessed current risk or urgent safeguarding concern, such as situations requiring an emergency management transfer or urgent rehousing.
15. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application/ a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme.
16. The Ombudsman recognises that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council for failing to re-house someone, if it has prioritised applicants and allocated properties according to its published lettings scheme policy.

Review rights and reassessments

17. Housing applicants can ask the council to review a wide range of decisions about their applications, including decisions about their housing priority. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))
18. Statutory guidance on the allocation of accommodation says:
• there should be a timescale for requesting a review - 21 days from the date of the decision is suggested as reasonable;
• reviews should normally be completed within a set deadline - 8 weeks is suggested as reasonable. The Council’s scheme say it will respond within 56 days.
19. In addition, the Council’s allocations policy says the Council may reassess an application where there is a change in circumstances or new information. It does not set any timescales for reassessments.

Bidding

20. The Council uses a choice-based lettings system. This means people on the housing register can place a bid on advertised social housing. The Council then, generally, places the bidders in level of priority and when they joined the housing register.
21. Properties are normally offered to eligible applicants in the highest housing needs band, subject to any restrictions in the advert, local lettings policies and the Annual Lettings Plan. Where no eligible higher-priority applicants are identified, the policy allows properties to be re-advertised or for the selection criteria to be reviewed.

Homelessness and domestic abuse

22. Where the council has reason to believe an applicant may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it should make enquiries to enable it to decide if they are eligible for assistance and, if so, what duty it owes them. (Housing Act 1996, section 184)
23. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
24. Since the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, section 177 of the Housing Act 1996 says it is not reasonable for a person to continue to occupy accommodation if it is probable that this will lead to violence or domestic abuse against them.
25. The council should try to get an account of the applicant’s experience to assess whether the behaviour they have experienced is abusive or whether they would be at risk of domestic abuse if they continued to occupy their accommodation. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, Chapter 21)
26. If a council has reason to believe an applicant may be homeless as a result of domestic abuse, the person will be in priority need and the council should make interim accommodation available to the applicant immediately whilst it undertakes its investigations. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 21.25)

Equality Act

27. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all. The Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the listed protected characteristics which include gender reassignment. They must also have regard to the general duties aimed at eliminating discrimination under the Public Sector Equality Duty.
28. The Ombudsman cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. But we can make decisions about whether or not an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them.
29. Organisations will often be able to show they have properly taken account of the Equality Act if they have considered the impact their decisions will have on the individuals affected and these decisions can be challenged, reviewed or appealed.

What happened

30. I have summarised the events.
31. Miss F moved into the Council’s area in 2018 after fleeing domestic abuse. She joined the housing register in 2021 and was placed in Band C. Her application says her accommodation lacked facilities or had only shared facilities.
32. In November 2024, Miss F asked the Council to reassess her housing register application due to a change in circumstances. She said her accommodation had become significantly damp due to a leak and she may have to move out so repairs could be done. Miss F said this was affecting her health and she felt vulnerable as a transgender woman and survivor of domestic abuse. She attached a GP letter which said her accommodation was negatively affecting her mental and physical health, describing stress, fatigue and isolation. The GP said the perpetrator knew Miss F’s address which made her feel uncomfortable and she was concerned her address was publicly known.
33. Miss F chased the Council over the next few months but received no reply.
34. Miss F complained to the Council on 5 March 2025 that she had not yet had a reply to her request for a reassessment. She also complained that properties she had unsuccessfully bid on had been re-listed.
35. The Council wrote to Miss F on 10 March. It said she had been correctly placed in Band C and did not meet the criteria for a medical reassessment. It advised Miss F to contact specialist services if she felt unsafe due to domestic abuse and signposted her to the private sector housing team regarding the condition of the property.
36. The letter said there were over 13,000 households currently on the waiting list and due to the very high demand “all of our available properties will be offered to applicants in Housing Needs ‘Band A’ and ‘Band B’ only.”
37. The Council replied to Miss F’s complaint on 11 March. It apologised for the delay in responding to her request for a reassessment but did not uphold her complaint. Miss F asked for the complaint to be escalated. She said it was distressing to be advised that she would not be considered for housing whilst she was in Band C.
38. The Council’s final complaint response on 17 April said the information provided did not show a current risk of domestic abuse and her application did not meet the criteria for medical priority. The Council explained that properties may be re-advertised if shortlisted bidders refuse after viewing and that applicants in Band C are not usually successful when bidding for social housing because of very high demand. It advised Miss F to seek help from homelessness services if she felt at risk and signposted her to domestic abuse support services and other housing options.
39. When she came to the Ombudsman, Miss F told me that the Council continued to re-advertise properties without considering the bids she had made. One property she bid on had been re-listed for 40 weeks.

My findings

40. The Council has accepted that it delayed replying to Miss F’s November 2024 request for a reassessment. It did not reply until March 2025. This was fault which caused Miss F distress. The Council has already apologised for that, which is an appropriate and proportionate remedy in line with our guidance.
41. The Council’s letter of 10 March said all properties will be offered to Band A and B applicants only. This implies that the Council had a policy to never offer a property to a Band C applicant. This would not be in line with legislation and guidance as Band C includes applicants with medical and welfare needs to move and some homeless people, who the law says the Council must give ‘reasonable preference’ for allocating housing.
42. In response to my enquiries about this, the Council said the letter was intended to mean that as an applicant in Band C, Miss F would not realistically be successful in bidding given the demand from applicants in Bands A and B. I consider the Council’s wording to Miss F should have been clearer. I would suggest in future it instead says that due to very high demand, Band C applicants were unlikely to be successful in bidding. But I do not find fault in the Council’s allocations policy.
43. Miss F complains the Council did not properly consider her application, or request for reassessment, and that as a result she is wrongly in Band C.
44. The Council considered the GP letter and assessed the impact of her accommodation on her physical and mental health as a moderate medical or welfare need rather than a serious or critical one. In response to my enquiries, the Council said experiencing stress as a result of difficult housing and work circumstance was not a ground for medical priority. Band C is appropriate for a person with moderate health or welfare need. The allocations policy does not require the Council to seek further medical advice where officers consider the information sufficient. I therefore find the Council’s assessment of medical priority and its decision not to refer the case to a medical adviser were in line with the allocations policy.
45. If councils have “reason to believe” a person may be homeless they must make inquiries and decide what, if any, further duty it owes. Since 2021, it is not reasonable for a person to continue to occupy accommodation if it is probable that this will lead to violence or domestic abuse against them. The GP letter referred to Miss F’s past experience of domestic abuse and her fear arising from the perpetrator being aware of her address. However, it did not evidence current abuse, imminent risk or urgent safeguarding circumstances. The Council was entitled to conclude that the threshold for homelessness caused by domestic abuse had not been met and that it was reasonable for Miss F to continue to occupy her current home. I have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council decided this.
46. There was no fault in the way the Council assessed Miss F’s housing application or decided her priority band. The Council considered the information provided about Miss F’s housing circumstances and health needs and assessed the application in line with its published allocations policy. It was entitled to decide that the evidence did not justify a higher priority band or additional medical priority. In addition, I have found no fault in the way the Council decided that the duty to make homelessness inquiries had not been triggered. I appreciate Miss F disagrees with the outcome, but we cannot question the merits of a properly made decision.
47. Miss F is concerned that the Council is re-advertising properties despite her bidding on them. The Council has sent evidence about the 38 properties that Miss F bid on from August 2024 to August 2025. 15 were not allocated to Band A or Band B applicants. Of these several properties were withdrawn by the landlord; some were withdrawn for urgent operational purposes, including temporary decants; others were re‑advertised because there were no suitable Band A or B bidders. The Council said even if it had made an offer on any of these properties to an applicant in Band C, Miss F would not have been successful. This was because most applicants above her in Band C have effective dates from as early as 2009, whereas her effective date is January 2021.
48. The Council’s allocations policy does not require it to make an offer to a Band C applicant simply because they have bid for a property or because no higher‑band allocation was made. Allocation depends on whether an applicant is eligible and suitable at the point an offer is considered, including meeting any property‑specific criteria and completing verification checks. Where the Council does not make a suitable allocation following shortlisting, the policy allows it to re‑advertise the property. I therefore do not find fault in the Council’s decision to re‑advertise the properties Miss F bid on.

Back to top

Decision

49. There was fault by the Council. I am satisfied that the actions the Council has already taken remedy the injustice caused. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman