Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Hounslow (18 016 087)

    Statement Not upheld Allocations 16-Apr-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council has unreasonably suspended Ms Y's housing register application causing her to become homeless. The Council has lifted Ms Y's suspension, will carry out a needs reassessment on her and an urgent homelessness assessment so the Ombudsman is discontinuing his investigation.

  • London Borough of Harrow (18 014 292)

    Statement Not upheld Allocations 12-Apr-2019

    Summary: Mr D complained about how the Council considered his sister's housing application which has meant her family has continued to live in unsuitable accommodation. However, we have found no fault with the Council's actions.

  • Maidstone Borough Council (18 013 396)

    Statement Not upheld Allocations 11-Apr-2019

    Summary: Ms X complains the Council refused her Housing Register application. There is no fault with how the Council assessed her application. We do not uphold Ms X's complaint.

  • London Borough of Newham (18 013 559)

    Statement Not upheld Allocations 09-Apr-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council's decision not to award him emergency rehousing status on medical grounds. The Ombudsman finds no fault with the way the Council made its decision. Because of this, the Ombudsman cannot comment on, or overturn, the decision itself.

  • London Borough of Hillingdon (18 008 841)

    Statement Upheld Allocations 09-Apr-2019

    Summary: Mr D complained about how the Council dealt with his housing situation. The Council took too long to decide his housing application. It took too long to progress his homelessness application and refused to issue a decision as Mr D would need a property suitable for his physical disability. This meant Mr D spent around a year longer than necessary in a property that did not meet his needs, was unsafe and with no access to proper washing facilities. The Council has agreed to review its processes, apologise to Mr D and pay him £2400 in recognition of the impact on him of its shortcomings.

  • Dacorum Borough Council (18 007 215)

    Statement Upheld Allocations 09-Apr-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains that the Council failed to give his housing application sufficient priority to enable him to move to suitable accommodation. The Ombudsman finds no fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr B's application and awarded priority. The Council was at fault in that the complaints team failed to pass new medical evidence on to the housing team and delayed in responding to Mr B's complaint but these failings did not cause Mr B a significant injustice.

  • London Borough of Southwark (18 006 329)

    Statement Upheld Allocations 04-Apr-2019

    Summary: Miss B complains about the way the Council dealt with her application to join the housing register. The Ombudsman finds there was fault by the Council in the way it dealt with information Miss B submitted. The fault meant that there was considerable delay before Miss B was awarded the correct priority for rehousing. Although she did not miss out on a suitable property as a result, she was caused considerable inconvenience, for which a remedy has been agreed.

  • Waveney District Council (18 010 770)

    Statement Not upheld Allocations 28-Mar-2019

    Summary: There is no fault in the Council's decision to suspend Mrs X's housing application.

  • Birmingham City Council (18 007 952)

    Statement Upheld Allocations 26-Mar-2019

    Summary: Miss B complains the Council did not consider properly her application to the housing register. She says it disregarded her medical evidence. The Council did not say why it would not accept Miss B's explanations of why the address on the GP's letter was different to her home address. The Council will, within the next six weeks, apologise to Miss B and consider a fresh application from her.

  • London Borough of Bromley (18 010 312)

    Statement Upheld Allocations 25-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council has dealt with his homeless application and its failure to provide him with suitable temporary or permanent accommodation. There was fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr X's homeless application, and this fault has caused Mr X an injustice.