Summary: We found fault by the Council on Miss Y’s complaint about the bid for accommodation she said she did not make. It failed to consider exercising discretion to not count it towards the maximum two bids refusal before closing her application. There was a failure to keep a record of a telephone call and follow the complaints procedure. The Council agreed to apologise, reconsider her submissions, remind relevant officers about considering exercising discretion and the need to follow proper process with formal complaints.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains about the Council wrongly:
1. recording her as bidding for accommodation in an area she did not want to live in;
2. offering her it even though she had not bid for it;
3. not allowing her the chance to view it before offering it her; and
4. allowing the same officer to review her complaint under both stages of the complaints process.
2. As a result, this has caused her a great deal of distress, and she was forced to disclose personal information she did not wish to disclose. In addition, it meant she lost entitlement to two housing offers.

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(1), 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. 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

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Miss Y, 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 (September 2020)

7. The scheme says (part 8) that ‘In most cases’, the Council will cancel the housing application and not make any further offers of accommodation if an applicant refuses, or is deemed to have refused, two offers of a home allocated either through the choice-based lettings website or through a direct offer.

What happened

8. In January 2025, Miss Y received a letter from the Council. It told her she was shortlisted for a property and was being offered first place for it under its choice based lettings scheme. It said she had bid for the property and was suspending her housing register application until the bid outcome was known. It explained she would be contacted to arrange a viewing. If she was invited to a viewing of the property, and did not accept it, or failed to attend the viewing, it would treat this as a refusal.
9. This surprised Miss Y as she had not bid for the property. She was not invited to view the property either.
10. She called the Council and spoke to two officers. Miss Y claimed they gave her conflicting and contradictory advice. She said she explained to them why she could not live in the post code area for this property. This was because of a serious incident she experienced on that part of the estate which she said she previously told the Council about. She avoided this part of the area for her own mental health.
11. The Council provided a copy of a note of one of the calls which was made to customer services. This said she was advised to contact ‘the team’ to ask further questions.
12. Following advice from the officers, she emailed the housing assessment team, explaining the position. I have seen a copy of this email. In it, she said, ‘under no circumstances would I have knowingly bid to live in this location’ and she had ‘never intentionally bid for this property’. She referred to a personal and deeply traumatic incident that happened in this area of the postcode. Miss Y also said she was worried this bid would be recorded as a first refusal. She asked how the bid could be removed from her account, so it did not affect her bidding status. Hearing nothing, she contacted her local MP.
13. Miss Y made a formal complaint and was unhappy the Council allowed the same officer to respond under both stages of its complaints procedure.
14. At stage 1 of the complaints procedure in February, the Council said it noted she had bid for several properties in the past for this area. She had a medical recommendation for a ground floor property.
15. In the Council’s stage 2 response to her complaint sent in July, it noted she was solely responsible for bidding for accommodation through the Choice Based Lettings website. It confirmed she had one offer of accommodation remaining and she was still eligible to bid.
16. The Council found no evidence of Miss Y previously telling it about any incident in any areas or about any safety concerns she had. I have seen a copy of her housing application and found no reference to areas she wished to avoid or information about any previous incidents affecting her housing choice.
17. The Council found no evidence its automated system, which places bidders’ names against the property bid for, had reports of problems or reports about the random placement of bids on accounts. It confirmed it did not invite her to view the property. This was because she contacted it to say she had not placed the bid and could not live on the estate.
18. The Council:

• accepted it was an error for the same officer to respond to both stage 1 and 2 under the complaints procedure.
• explained she did not tell it about preferred areas because she places bids herself for accommodation which means she can identify where each one is.
• noted in one of her emails she said, ‘I must stress that I have never intentionally bid for this property’.
• confirmed this was not a reviewable decision

19. The Council provided a screen shot of the bids Miss Y placed for accommodation from 2023 to 2025. This showed she placed three other bids advertised later that year in the same post code area, and one the previous year. These properties were about 0.7 to 0.9 miles from the offered property. Miss Y explained the fact she made bids for properties in the same postcode did not mean she was prepared to live on the estate of the offered property.
20. The Council’s complaints procedure has the following stages:

• First stage: This is acknowledged within five working days. An officer from the service the complaint is directed at will investigate and provide a full response within ten working days.
• Second stage: This will be done by a senior manager of the relevant Head of Service or in some cases, by a senior manager from another service area. The response is sent within 20 days.

My Findings

Complaint a): recording bid in area she did not want

21. I found no fault on this complaint. This is because:

• there is no evidence of Miss Y telling the Council previously she could not live in any specific area; and
• even if she had, the choice-based system the Council has means applicants place bids themselves. Applicants, not the Council, choose what properties to bid on.

Complaint b): offering her a property she had not bid on

22. I make the following findings:
1. There is no evidence the Council, or its system, wrongly or randomly placed a bid on this property. This means I cannot say the Council was responsible, or at fault, for the bid on this property.
2. In her emails to the Council about this bid, some of the phrases used appear to suggest she might have unintentionally made the bid.
3. There was no record of one of the telephone call conversations Miss Y said she had with an officer. This was fault. I am not satisfied this caused an injustice. This is because she went on to email the housing assessment team with her concerns anyway.
4. The Council was at fault for failing to show it considered exercising discretion to not count the disputed bid towards her two-bid refusal limit at which point her application would be cancelled. This is because its housing allocation scheme states that ‘In most cases’, it will cancel the application and make no further offers to an applicant where two offers are made.
5. While this refers to two offers, this sentence confirms the Council has discretion to not apply the rule it usually applies in most cases. There was no evidence of the Council considering whether it should exercise such discretion on the bid she claimed she had not made.
6. I am satisfied this failure caused Miss Y an injustice. She lost the opportunity of the Council considering whether it needed to exercise discretion or not. She has the uncertainty of not knowing what the decision outcome would have been had it exercised it.

Complaint c): not offering her a viewing

23. The Council’s letter offering the property to Miss Y said she would be contacted to view the property.
24. The Council explained the reason why she was not contacted to view it was because it considered the email she sent the same day it sent the offer was a refusal. This was because she said she could not live on the estate.
25. I found no fault on this complaint. This is because in the circumstances, I am satisfied it was reasonable for the Council to consider her response was a refusal which meant there was no reason for her to view it. In reaching this view, I took account of her email responding to the offer. In it she said, ‘I am now deeply worried that this bid will be recorded as a first refusal’.

Complaint d): complaint handling

26. I found fault on this complaint because the complaints procedure was not followed. While the Council explained the two stages were months apart, which contributed to the error, the procedure states both stages are dealt with by different officers. What happened with Miss Y’s responses was they were both sent by the same officer.
27. I am satisfied this caused Miss Y an injustice. Her confidence in the complaints procedure was undermined, and she lost the opportunity to have it looked at and decided properly.

Back to top

Action

28. I took account of our guidance on remedies.
29. The Council agreed to take the following action within four weeks of the final decision on this complaint:
1. Send a written apology to Miss Y for the failure to: consider exercising discretion not to count this offer as one of two offers it would make before cancelling her application; deal with her complaint properly through its complaints procedure.
2. Consider her submissions and decide whether it should exercise discretion to not count this refusal towards her two-refusal limit.
3. Remind all relevant officers of the need to consider exercising discretion to not count a refusal of an offer towards the two-refusal limit in all the circumstances of the case.
4. Remind the complaints team of the proper process for dealing with a complaint under its complaints procedure.
30. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

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

32. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman