Summary: Miss D says the Council failed to assess housing medical need applications in 2025 and failed to assist her with finding a smaller home. I have found fault because the Council delayed updating Miss D’s banding on her housing register account. I do not consider that resulted in an injustice because Miss D did not lose a chance to successfully bid for a new home in that period.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Miss D) says the Council failed to assess “numerous” housing medical need assessment requests. She also states the Council failed to assist her family to downsize from their Council property.

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. I have considered events from September 2024 through to 6 October 2025 when the final stage complaint response was issued by the Council. I have advised Miss D that any issues with the Council after that date would need to form a new complaint to the Council before it can be considered by the 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.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

7. Miss D and her parent occupied a three bedroom Council property.

Events before my investigation timeframe

2024

8. On 19 July 2024 the Council noted it had received a request from Miss D for the household to move to a two bedroom bungalow. On 8 August an Officer spoke to Miss D and confirmed there was an application to move home.

Events I have investigated

9. On 3 October the Council inspected Miss D’s home to see if they were eligible for increased banding under the Tenant Incentive Scheme. I do not have a note of that inspection. On 23 December the Council noted the household had been approved for the Tenant Incentive Scheme and awarded band 1 housing priority.

2025

10. In April 2025 the Council was contacted by a medical professional working with Miss D. She said Miss D and her parent were struggling to cope in the property and asked whether they should provide additional evidence in support of the case. The Council replied that further evidence was not needed because the household were already in band 1 which was the highest band. The Council’s housing stock only consisted of 0.75% two bedroom bungalows.
11. On 6 May an Officer spoke to Miss D and advised there were limited numbers of two bedroom bungalows. The Council would also consider a direct let if a suitable property was available. Also that day the Council noted that Miss D had been awarded band 1 in December 2024, but the housing register account still showed band 3 and asked this be corrected. On 7 May the Council said the account was updated to band 1, it had not been done sooner because the necessary paperwork had not been received.
12. Miss D told me she made “numerous” online applications for a housing medical needs assessment in the first six months of 2025. She said she did not receive any acknowledgement or a reference number. The Council does not have a record of receiving those applications.
13. In August Miss D complained to the Council. She said her parent could no longer access the bath at their home and they needed to move to a two bedroom bungalow urgently. She also detailed her medical conditions and how they were impacted by their current home. She said the cost of running a larger home was too much and this was another reason for a move. On 15 August an Officer spoke to Miss D and explained the bidding process.
14. On 8 September 2025 the Council replied to the complaint. It said the household were in band 1. It said the family had not bid for any properties since 2023. Officers had discussed with Miss D and her parent about considering widening the search parameters for a new home because there was limited availability of two bedroom bungalows. The Council had also spoken to Miss D about a possible direct offer of a property, but it had been rejected because it was too far from medical facilities. Miss D subsequently asked the Council to escalate her complaint. She said she had bid for properties and could not expand her search area as the family needed to be near medical facilities. She advised her parent could not use the current bathing arrangements at the property and asked if the Council would consider adaptations to the home whilst they were waiting to move.
15. On 15 September a Private Sector Rental Team Officer spoke to Miss D about the possibility of moving to a private rental home. Miss D had concerns but said she would consider this option if a suitable and affordable two bedroom bungalow was available. On 19 September an Officer visited Miss D who suggested to the Council she would consider two one bedroom bungalows in the hope of being rehoused sooner. On 25 September the Council confirmed to Officers that Miss D and her parent could apply separately for rehousing.
16. On 6 October the Council issued its final stage complaint response. It said the medical needs of the family had last been assessed in December 2023. It advised on how to request a new assessment. The Council said it understood why Miss D and her parent wanted to be near medical facilities but explained they could seek assistance with NHS travel costs and provided a link on how to access that provision. It said it could consider adaptations at the current property and gave Miss D the contact details for its Disabled Adaptations Team.

Events outside my investigation timeframe

17. On 5 November an Officer visited Miss D and explained about making two separate housing register applications. The Council then treat the new applications as a priority and later in November Miss D and her parent were both placed in band 1 under the Tenant Incentive Scheme and eligible for one bedroom bungalows.
18. In early 2026 Miss D and her parent were both rehoused near to each other in one bedroom bungalows because of direct lets by the Council.

What should have happened

19. Under the Council’s Allocations Policy an existing Council tenant can apply to join the housing register if they want to move home. The Council will assess their housing need and place them into a housing band (band 1 is the highest priority through to band 5).
20. Band 1 applicants include those with an assessed urgent medical or welfare need and exceptional cases. Band 3 is awarded to applicants with a medium medical need (where there is evidence that moving to alternative accommodation will improve a significant health condition) and to those under occupying a Council property.
21. Where a Council tenant is under occupying their home and wants to downsize the Council will inspect the property to see if they are eligible for the Tenant Incentive Scheme. This offers support and financial assistant to tenants who want to downsize. A successful applicant receives financial assistance with the cost of moving home and are awarded band 1 housing property.
22. The Council usually expects applicants to bid for advertised social housing. It can make an exception and offer a direct let in some cases including where a Council tenant is under occupying their home and needs to move because of affordability issues. A direct let can also be made to older applicants depending on their personal circumstances.

Was there fault by the Council

23. There is fault by the Council because it awarded Miss D and her parent band 1 housing priority at the end of December 2024, but the housing register account was not updated until 7 May 2025. The Council should have ensured it had the correct paperwork in place at the end of December to update the banding.
24. Miss D told me she submitted numerous requests for a review of the household’s medical housing need in 2025. She has no supporting evidence as she did it via an online form. The Council also has no record of receiving those applications, so I am unable to say with any certainty whether they were correctly submitted. Due to an absence of evidence I cannot find the Council at fault in this matter. I also note that even if Miss D had made a medical application, it would not have increased her chances of being rehoused because she had already been awarded band 1 priority.
25. Miss D feels the Council did not do enough to help her move home. I have considered all the evidence and have not found evidence of fault by the Council. It assessed the household in 2024 and awarded Miss D and her parent band 1 housing need which is the highest priority. The Council also looked at direct lets to assist the family but, as it advised Miss D, there was a very limited number of two bedroom bungalows available. Once Miss D was happy to accept a one bedroom bungalow the Council was able to offer suitable direct lets to Miss D and her parent. I appreciate Miss D wanted the housing situation resolved sooner but I cannot see there were any reasonable additional steps the Council could have taken to assist her.

Did the fault cause an injustice

26. The Council delayed updating Miss D’s housing register account to band 1. I do not see that delay caused a significant injustice because the Council was looking out for suitable two bedroom bungalows for the household during that period. I checked with the Council to see if Miss D lost an opportunity to successfully bid for a home during the period of delay, it has confirmed she did not. I do not consider the fault resulted in an outstanding injustice to Miss D.

Back to top

Decision

27. I find fault not causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman