Summary: Ms D complains the Council delayed progressing her housing register application. I have found fault by the Council. There were delays totalling nine months which meant Ms D missed out on securing a new home sooner. The Council has agreed to pay Ms D redress.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Ms D) says the Council delayed processing her housing register application and activating her account. She also refers to poor communications from the Housing Officer and a failure to keep her updated. The delays caused Ms D distress, and she was unable to bid for social housing properties until her account was activated.

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 investigated

4. I have looked at events covering January 2025 (when Ms D applied to join the housing register) through to December (when the case was referred to our Assessment Team).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Ms D, her representative and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. I shared my draft decision with both parties and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

Events I have investigated

7. On 21 January 2025 Ms D applied to the Council to join the housing register. On 4 February the Council booked an appointment to speak to Ms D on 14 February. Ms D was unable to attend the meeting because she was unwell. On 7 March a Housing Officer carried out a telephone meeting with Ms D and requested Ms D send documentation to aid the assessment of her application.
8. In the period between March and May I understand there was contact from Ms D and Ms D’s representative (referred to as Ms E) with the Housing Officer about submitting documentation. The evidence is limited because contact was direct with the Housing Officer who has now left the Council.
9. On 29 May Ms E asked the Council for guidance on how to submit Ms D’s medical evidence. The Housing Officer replied on 11 June, she apologised for the delay. She had received a link in an email but noted concerns about opening unfamiliar links because of security risks. Ms E replied the format had been used because the medical evidence was substantial and could not be sent as an attached document. Ms E offered to provide hard copies in person. On 2 July Ms E emailed a complaint to the Council about delay and a lack of communication with Ms D’s case.
10. On 25 August it appears the Council received documents from Ms D/ Ms E including a completed Housing Health and Disability (HHD) form. The Council says it is unable to fully confirm how the documents were received. On 28 August the representative requested the Council escalate Ms D’s complaint. On 25 September the HHD Team noted receipt of the form and evidence from Ms D.
11. On 26 September the Council issued its final stage complaint response. It said the initial complaint reply had not properly addressed the points raised by Ms D. There had been challenges accessing documentation supplied by Ms D, but it had taken too long to resolve the matter. It also accepted Ms D had not received updates and the Housing Officer had not maintained contact. The Council had referred the case to the HHD Team to assess if Ms D had a medical priority, the application would be prioritised. The Council said it aimed to assess a housing register application within eight weeks, and it had failed to do so for Ms D. It had reminded the Housing Officer to provide regular updates. It had also considered the request to allocate a different officer to the case; it decided the application was ‘close to resolution’ and it would not be beneficial to relocate the case.
12. On 3 November Ms E asked the Council for an update on the case. On 13 November the HHD Team told the Housing Solutions Manager it had assessed the medical evidence and awarded Ms D 900 health and independence points.

Events outside my investigation period

13. In January 2026 Ms E told the Ombudsman that Ms D had not heard from the Council since November and her housing register account had not been activated. On 10 February the Housing Solutions Manager emailed Ms D a housing register decision letter explaining she had been awarded 900 points. They said the HHD Team should have sent an outcome letter. On 30 April Ms D was successful in bidding for a property. I understand she moved into the new home in May.

What should have happened

14. A resident can apply to the Council to join its housing register and then bid for advertised social housing. The Council will assess the applicant’s eligibility and housing need to determine what level of points to award. Based on the points allocation the applicant is placed into a housing band ranging from band 1 for those with ‘exceptional priority’ through to band 4 for applicants with 10 points. Applicants awarded 900 health and independence points are placed in band 2. Applicants can then bid for advertised social housing, broadly speaking the Council will award a property to the applicant with the highest level of points and the longest time on the housing register.
15. If an applicant says they need to move because of a medical issue the Council will ask them to complete a HHD form and submit evidence from professionals. This is assessed by the HHD Team who require ‘substantial evidence from specialist services’ to show the applicant has a medical condition that ‘substantially impacts’ on their health and that other options have been explored to make the property suitable. If the HHD Team are satisfied the requirements are met it will award 900 points. The Council should write to the applicant with a decision and update the housing register account so the applicant can bid for a home.
16. The Council will usually ask an applicant to send medical evidence as part of the housing register application if there is reference to medical need. If an applicant sends the information in a format that cannot be opened the Council should ask for it to be resent in an alternative format or to provide a hard copy.
17. If an applicant asks the Council to reallocate a Housing Officer, the Council will consider each case on its merits. A Manager will decide if it is appropriate to reassign a case.

Was there fault by the Council

18. Ms D says the Council delayed processing her application. Although the evidence is limited in this case it is clear to me the Council failed to progress Ms D’s application at a reasonable pace. The Housing Officer should have resolved the issue with receiving medical evidence by the end of March, instead there was limited action taken. Even when Ms E offered to provide hard copies to the Council at the end of August the Housing Officer failed to respond or to clarify what type of formats the documents could be sent via email. There was further delay because once the documents were received, they were not forwarded to the relevant team for a month. I do note the Council prioritised assessment of the evidence after the final stage complaint response, but the faults continued. A points decision was reached on 13 November, but the Council failed to update Ms D’s housing register account. Ms D did not have her account corrected until February, a delay of another three months. In total I have found delays of nine months which is unacceptable. Those delays were all the result of failure by Officers to take prompt and effective action and were avoidable.
19. Ms D wanted the Council to allocate her a different Housing Officer. There is no fault in the Council’s decision not to change the Officer, and it gave a reasonable explanation for its decision to Ms D. However, in the final stage complaint response the Council accepted the Housing Officer had not provided updates to Ms D and said this would be resolved for the remainder of her case. That did not happen. Instead, Ms D did not receive any contact until February 2026. The Council should have ensured Ms D received a reasonable level of service and failed to do so.

Did the fault cause an injustice

20. The faults by the Council meant Ms D lost an opportunity to successfully bid for a new home in 2025. She was also caused avoidable time and trouble pursuing her case.

Back to top

Action

21. The Council has accepted it did not provide a reasonable level of service to Ms D and has offered to pay £450 redress. I consider that to be a reasonable remedy.
22. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions within four weeks of this case closing.

Back to top

Decision

23. I find fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman