Summary: There was fault by the Council in a complaint alleging fault in its dealings with the complainant over housing matters. The Council agreed to provide a financial remedy to address the injustice suffered by the complainant.

The complaint

1. Ms X alleges fault by the Council in its dealings with her over various housing matters. Ms X says:
• She received advice from the Council’s customer services team that the Council would help her with a deposit and the first month’s rent when she found a flat but the Council then told her she had to register first before it could help her.
• The Council refused her housing register application without taking account of her circumstances and the representations she made when she asked for an appeal against its decision.
• She is unhappy with the Council’s decision when she was threatened with homelessness in September 2019.
• She reported harassment by her landlord to the Council many times in 2019 and 2020 but did not receive any proper response or help. Her home is not safe and fit to live in but the Council discriminated against her.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I examined the complaint and background information provided by Ms X. I discussed matters with Ms X and a friend of hers who made the complaint on her behalf. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its comments on the complaint and the information it provided. I sent a draft decision statement to Ms X and the Council and considered the comments of both parties on it.

Back to top

What I found

Background

Housing options and homelessness matters

5. Ms X moved to the Leicester area in early 2019. Before she approached the Council for assistance, she lived in a property which was privately arranged with a short term licence or tenancy.
6. In May 2019, Ms X says she visited the Council and was told it could help her with a deposit and the first month’s rent. She found a flat and then approached the Council again for assistance with the deposit and rent. She says she was told she had to ‘register’ first and it would take four weeks before the Council could help her.
7. Ms X says she had already committed to a tenancy, had to borrow to pay the deposit and had found paying the first month’s rent difficult. So, Ms X made a complaint to the Council.
8. The Council asked Ms X for details of the officer with whom she had discussed her situation. As she could not provide the details it did not proceed further with the complaint. The Council notes it has a range of schemes to help with private rentals. But it says the sort of advice Ms X claims she was given would not ordinarily be given by its customer services officers as they would be unable to assess a person’s eligibility for the schemes.
9. In May 2019, Ms X applied to join the Council’s housing register. In late May 2019, the Council refused Ms X’s application. It informed her she was ineligible to join the register because she did not meet its local connection criteria.
10. In June 2019, Ms X challenged the Council’s decision on her application to join the housing register. She said she had recently received leave to remain in the country, she had difficulties accessing services and rebuilding her life due to a language barrier, she had health problems, and the Council’s decision was not in compliance with the Equality Act.
11. Ms X sent further representations in July 2019. Ms X said she had a connection to Leicester because she was going to ESOL classes in Leicester. She said she could not stay in a different town because of financial, cultural and language barriers. She said her landlord had served notice on her to vacate the property.
12. The Council reviewed its decision in August 2019. The Council noted the representations made by Ms X. It said it had taken them into account but decided to uphold its original decision. It did not explain how it weighed Ms X’s representations but pointed out Ms X did not meet the criteria set out in its housing allocations policy.
13. In July 2019, Ms X told the Council her landlord had asked her to leave her home in 55 days. The Council offered Ms X a housing options interview late in July. At the interview, the housing officer established the landlord’s notice to quit was invalid. It told Ms X she was not therefore threatened with homelessness but she could come back if her landlord served another notice. The Council did not provide Ms X with a formal decision notice under section 184 of the Housing Act 1996.
14. The Council responded to a complaint from Ms X about the homelessness decision in September 2019. It noted the events of July 2019 and explained why the landlord’s notice was invalid.

Housing disrepair

15. Ms X says she reported harassment by her landlord in 2019 and 2020 but no action was taken by the Council.
16. The Council’s records show Ms X and a friend of hers contacted it to say her landlord had disconnected the gas and electricity to her home. A housing officer telephoned Ms X and her friend as well as the landlord. It transpires her landlord was in the process of switching the energy supply to the property.
17. The housing officer discussed the case with the landlord who informed the officer that he did not intend to serve notice on Ms X. The landlord felt every time there was a problem in the property Ms X reported him to the Council. The landlord said he resolved problems whenever they arose.
18. The Council officer telephoned Ms X with the help of an interpreter. The officer explained the steps she had taken. The officer decided Ms X’s case would be closed.
19. Ms X provided the Council with a notice to quit from the landlord in August 2020. The Council established the notice was invalid. It contacted Ms X’s landlord to confirm the notice was invalid. The landlord informed the Council he had appointed an agent to manage contact with Ms X.

Finding

The complaint about help with the deposit and first month’s rent

20. There is no record of a conversation between Ms X and the Council’s customer services team. So I cannot now establish the material facts of Ms X’s claim. Without corroborating evidence of the conversation it is not possible to say whether or not the Council acted with fault.

The complaint about the housing register

21. Ms X’s complaint is that the Council refused her housing register application without taking account of her circumstances and the representations she made when she asked for an appeal of its decision.
22. The Council is adamant that all circumstances and representations it received were considered by it. It stresses that all applicants to join its housing register must meet the local connection criteria. It says at the time of applying, Ms X did not meet the local connection criteria.
23. I find fault by the Council on this point. The Council is correct to say that all applicants to join the register must meet the local connection criteria. That is not in question. However, the Council’s August 2019 review decision letter did not explain how it took account of the representations made by Ms X. It said it had taken account of her representations. But it did not explain how.
24. It is unclear how the Council considered whether Ms X’s representations meant it should make an exception to its local connection criteria. This suggests it took a blanket approach to the local connection rule whereas councils should always consider arguments of exceptional circumstances. I find fault because the Council failed to consider whether to make an exception to its policies.
25. And the consequence of this fault? I cannot say whether the Council would have accepted Ms X’s representations had it properly considered its discretion. So I cannot determine the extent of injustice it caused Ms X. As Ms X has resided in Leicester since 2019 she can make a new application to join the housing register. If she still does not meet the local connection criteria but makes representations that point to exceptions to the criteria the Council is obliged to consider them.
26. This matter has clearly caused distress to Ms X, however, and I find the feeling of distress is justified. A sum of £150 to Ms X is warranted to reflect the distress she was caused.

The complaint about the Council’s homelessness decision in July 2019

27. Ms X was assessed by a homelessness prevention officer in July 2019. The Council found the notice to quit served by her landlord had not followed the correct process. She was not homeless or at risk of homelessness within 56 days.
28. If a local authority, following an initial interview, decides that a prospective applicant is either not eligible for assistance or not homeless or threatened with homelessness, then no duties will be owed to the applicant. If that is the case, then the authority should issue a section 184 decision letter.
29. The Council did not do so in this case. That is fault. The result is that Ms X was denied the opportunity to request a review of the decision.
30. And the injustice? It is clear the notice to quit served by the landlord was invalid. So, it is unlikely a review of the Council’s decision would have reached a different conclusion that Ms X was either homeless or threatened with homelessness at the time. I do not therefore consider Ms X suffered a significant injustice that now warrants a remedy from the Ombudsman.

The complaint about housing disrepair

31. Ms X says she was harassed by her landlord on many occasions in 2019 and 2020. However, the evidence I have seen satisfies me the Council took steps to investigate her reports of disrepair in her home. It did not conclude further action was required under the housing health and safety rating system. I am satisfied there was no fault by the Council regarding the reports of housing disrepair or harassment by Ms X’s landlord.

Back to top

Final decision

32. There was fault by the Council. The complaint was closed because the Council agreed to remedy the injustice caused to Ms X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman