Summary: Mr X complains the Council unlawfully suspended his housing register application while it reassessed his situation; and, delayed in processing a medical assessment form for his mother and change of circumstances form. He says the Council policy says it should complete its reassessment within six weeks. Mr X says this has caused him distress and to be disadvantaged in relation to his place on the housing register. We have found fault in the Council’s actions for delay in assessing Mr X’s medical and change of circumstances forms and for providing confusing information about his case being suspended. The Council has agreed to write to Mr X to issue an apology, pay him a financial payment and complete a service improvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council unlawfully suspended his housing register application while it reassessed his situation; and, delayed in processing a medical assessment form for his mother and change of circumstances form. He says the Council policy says it should complete its reassessment within six weeks.
2. Mr X says this has caused him distress and to be disadvantaged in relation to his place on the housing register.

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. 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

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr X and the Council were invited to comment on my draft decision. I have considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

8. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
9. 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))

Reasonable preference

10. 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))

11. Housing applicants can ask the council to review a wide range of decisions about their applications. Government guidance (allocation of accommodation: guidance for local authorities) provides guidance on review procedures. This says reviews should be completed wherever practicable within a set deadline. Eight weeks is suggested as a reasonable timeframe.

Homelessness Code of Guidance

12. The Homelessness Code of Guidance says:

6.5 Section 176 provides that accommodation shall be treated as available for a person’s occupation only if it is available for occupation by them together with:

a. any other person who normally resides with them as a member of the family; or,

b. any other person who might reasonably be expected to reside with them.

6.6 Both of these groups of people constitute members of the applicant’s household, and accommodation will only be considered to be available if it is available for occupation by both the applicant and all members of their household.

6.7 The first group covers those members of the family who normally reside with the applicant. It is a question of fact as to who is living with the applicant, and housing authorities are not required to satisfy themselves that it is reasonable for this member of the family to normally reside with them. The phrase ‘as a member of the family’, although not defined for these purposes in legislation, will include those with close blood or marital relationships and cohabiting partners, and, where such a person is an established member of the household, the accommodation must provide for them as well.

6.8 The second group relates to any other person, and includes those who may not have been living as part of the household at the time of the application but whom it would be reasonable to expect to live with the applicant as part of their household. People in this group might include a companion for an elderly or disabled person, or children who are being fostered by the applicant or a member of their family. This group will also include those members of the family who were not living as part of the household at the time of the application but who nonetheless might reasonably be expected to form part of it.

6.9 In relation to the second group, it is for the housing authority to assess whether any other person might reasonably be expected to live with the applicant and there will be a range of situations that the authority will need to consider. Persons who would normally live with the applicant but who are unable to do so because there is no accommodation in which they can all live together should be included in the assessment. When dealing with a family which has split up, housing authorities will need to take a decision as to which members of the family normally reside, or might be expected to reside, with the applicant. A court may have made a residence order indicating with whom the children are to live, but in many cases it will be a matter of agreement between the parents and a court will not have been involved.

The Council’s allocation scheme

13. The Councils allocation policy says adults may not be added to an application where this would result in the need for larger accommodation than originally assessed, unless the applicant can demonstrate a need to join the household.
14. Under the change of address and/or circumstances section, the Council’s allocation policy says applications may be deactivated during the period whilst the council reassess the information provided by the applicant.

What happened

15. Mr X approached the Council in September 2023 with his partner and child and completed a homelessness application. The Council provided Mr X with accommodation the following day.
16. The Council accepted the main housing duty in October 2023. The Council provided Mr X with different accommodation in January 2024.
17. Mr X filed a medical assessment in early March 2025 and chased a response from the Council around two weeks later. The Council confirmed it had received the medical assessment request a few days later.
18. Mr X filed a change of circumstances form in mid-May 2025 as his mother had moved into his accommodation.
19. Mr X chased a response from the Council regarding the change of circumstances form in mid-June. The Council told Mr X its triage team would contact him. The Council confirmed receipt of the change of circumstances form several days later.
20. Mr X chased a response in June 2025 to the medical assessment he filed in March 2025.
21. Mr X raised a complaint in late June 2025 and said the Council had failed to respond to the medical assessment request or change of circumstances form he had filed.
22. The Council issued a stage one complaint response in mid-July2025 and said it had suspended Mr X’s case due to reassessing it for the change of circumstances he reported. The Council accepted there had been delays in communications and offered Mr X £200 to recognise this.
23. Mr X raised a stage two complaint and said he was unhappy the Council had suspended his application so he could not bid. Mr X said this was against the Council’s policy.
24. The Council issued a stage two response in mid-August 2025 which said it did not uphold Mr X’s stage two complaint but did increase its offer to £300 to recognise the delays in communication. The Council said it would be in contact with Mr X.
25. Mr X completed an Accommodation Suitability checklist in mid-December 2025 and chased a response from the Council following its stage two response.
26. The Council issued a decision letter in early January 2026 in relation to the medical assessment request and change of circumstances form. The Council explained it had decided Mr X’s mother should not be added to his household. This was because it was not clear she was homeless in her own right, had other family members who had provided support to her and it had not been demonstrated it was reasonable or necessary to add her to Mr X’s household. The Council said Mr X’s mother could apply in her own right.
27. The Council reviewed this decision in April 2026 and upheld the decision made in January.

Analysis

28. The Council has accepted it delayed in communicating with Mr X regarding the medical assessment and change in circumstances form. The Council offered £300 in its complaint response in August 2025 which Mr X accepted. This is a suitable remedy for the period this covered.
29. The Council said in its stage two response it would be in contact with Mr X to assess the suitability of his property following the assessment and change of circumstances form. I cannot see this happened which led Mr X to chase a response in December 2025. This is fault and would have caused Mr X further distress and inconvenience.
30. The Council said in its stage one response it had suspended Mr X’s application due to it being reassessed. Mr X says this is against the Council’s policy.
31. The Council’s policy says it may deactivate an application during a reassessment. However, the Council has confirmed it did not suspend Mr X’s application at any point.
32. The information provided to Mr X in the stage one response is different to that provided in response to our enquiries. The Council has confirmed it did not suspend Mr X’s account; therefore, the information provided at stage one was not correct. This is fault and has caused Mr X distress and worry.
33. Mr X has said he is unhappy with the decision the Council made regarding adding his mother to his household. The Council has explained how it has reached its decision in line with its policy. I have not found fault with the way in which the Council has assessed the change in circumstances form and therefore cannot question the outcome.

Back to top

Action

34. Within four weeks of a decision, the Council should:

• Write to Mr X to apologise for the distress, worry and inconvenience caused by the faults identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Pay Mr X a further £250 to recognise the additional frustration and inconvenience caused.
• Advise the Ombudsman of what actions the Council will take to reduce the delay in responding to communications regarding medical assessment requests and change of circumstances forms.

35. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

36. I find fault causing injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman