Canterbury City Council (25 014 299)

Statement Not upheld Allocations 21-Jul-2026

Summary: Miss X complains the Council did not deal with her housing and homelessness properly, causing avoidable distress and incorrect housing priority being granted. The Council is not at fault.

Birmingham City Council (25 008 481)

Statement Not upheld Allocations 21-Jul-2026

Summary: Miss X complained the Council refused her a discretionary shortlisting request for a direct offer of a property, refused to provide aids and adaptation in her current accommodation and did not properly deal with her concerns about alleged noise disturbance. There was no fault by the Council with how it dealt with Miss X’s case.

London Borough of Ealing (25 009 689)

Statement Upheld Allocations 21-Jul-2026

Summary: Mr X complained the Council mishandled his housing application, incorrectly assessed his medical priority and mishandled subsequent homelessness application and review request. We find the Council at fault for failing to apply the correct exemption criteria to Mr X’s application. This caused Mr X to be removed from the housing register and caused him distress, frustration and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, reinstate Mr X’s application and make a symbolic payment to remedy the injustice caused.

London Borough of Tower Hamlets (25 018 172)

Statement Upheld Allocations 20-Jul-2026

Summary: Mrs C complained about the way the Council in respect of her housing application, dealt with her request for a medical assessment and her request for a direct offer of accommodation. We found fault in the Council’s actions. It has agreed to apologise to Mrs C, make a symbolic payment and improve its procedures for the future.

London Borough of Tower Hamlets (26 008 908)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 19-Jul-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decisions relating to a housing application. This is because the matters X is complaining about, happened more than 12 months ago, and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider it now.

West Northamptonshire Council (25 004 514)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 16-Jul-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms X’s application to join the Council’s housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Canterbury City Council (26 002 787)

Statement Upheld Allocations 16-Jul-2026

Summary: The Council was not at fault for its initial handling of Mr X’s homelessness application and housing register application. It accepted its homelessness duty to Mr X, offered him interim accommodation and properly assessed his housing priority. The Council was at fault for later delays in deciding whether it owed Mr X a main housing duty and medical priority. This caused Mr X uncertainty but did not impact Mr X’s homelessness or housing applications. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X.

London Borough of Croydon (25 031 876)

Statement Upheld Allocations 16-Jul-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to properly deal with a complaint about a housing matter. This is because the Council has agreed to conclude its stage one complaint handling procedures in line with our recommendations and an investigation at this stage would not be proportionate.    

London Borough of Southwark (25 015 163)

Statement Upheld Allocations 15-Jul-2026

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to complete its assessment of medical evidence he provided in support of his housing register application within its published timeframe and did not award his application the correct priority banding. We found fault by the Council on both matters. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X, make him a symbolic payment and check its records to see if he would have been made an offer of suitable accommodation if the delay had not occurred.

Wychavon District Council (25 013 672)

Statement Upheld Allocations 14-Jul-2026

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has not fully considered her circumstances when it rejected her housing application. Mrs X said this distressed her. There was fault in the way the Council did not fully consider or respond to Mrs X’s appeal. This has not caused Mrs X a significant personal injustice and the Council has acted to improve its service.