Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has not considered her medical condition as part of her housing application and that she is overcrowded. There is no evidence to suggest the Council has placed Mrs X in the wrong priority band or that it has not considered her medical evidence. The Council has suggested Mrs X should get an occupational therapy assessment.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council has not considered her medical condition as part of her housing application and that she is overcrowded. She also complains that bids she places for available properties are classed as ineligible.
2. Mrs X says she is experiencing stress as a result of living in unsuitable accommodation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• discussed the issues with the complainant;
• sent my draft decision to both the Council and the complainant and invited their comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mrs X has been living in a first floor two bedroom flat with her two daughters since July 2012. She has been assessed as having a three bedroom need and is currently on the housing register and is able to place bids on available properties.
7. Mrs X says the accommodation she currently lives in is unsuitable as her family is overcrowded and she has disabilities. Mrs X says that because she is in temporary accommodation she cannot make adaptations to it.
8. Mrs X complained to the Council about her accommodation in August 2019. The Council sent its response on 6 January 2020. It said that while it noted Mrs X’s family was assessed as having a three bedroom need, the property was not so small as to fall before the size thresholds in the housing act. It also said that while Mrs X said she had medical concerns, the most recent medical information it held was from 2014 and did not indicate the accommodation was unsuitable. It said while she mentioned needing adaptations, no occupational therapy report had been provided to support this. The Council concluded the property was suitable.
9. Mrs X escalated the complaint to the next stage of the Council’s corporate complaints Mrs X had not provided any new medical evidence or occupational therapy report, it considered she was suitably housed.
10. Mrs X had sent a letter to the Council dated 9 January 2020 from her GP. In the letter the GP provided details of her medical condition and said she was taking strong painkillers for the pain and had reduced mobility. The GP asked the Council to take this information into consideration and offer appropriate accommodation for her needs.

Analysis

11. Mrs X says the Council has not given enough consideration to her circumstances and considers this is why she remains in her current accommodation which she says is unsuitable. In particular, Mrs X says she is overcrowded and has medical needs.
12. The Council’s allocations policy puts applicants into three priority bands. The policy details the criteria for each band. Mrs X is owed a homeless duty by the Council and is currently in temporary accommodation. The policy states that anyone owed a homeless duty will be given a band three priority.
13. To be considered for a higher band the Council would need to be satisfied that Mrs X had an urgent medical need or that the property was severely overcrowded.
14. Due to the ages of the family members, Mrs X’s family is assessed as having a three bedroom need and so requires one extra bedroom. The Council’s allocation policy states the severe overcrowding priority is awarded when an applicant’s household is overcrowded by two or more rooms. I am therefore not persuaded Mrs X can be considered to be severely overcrowded and so is not entitled to be in priority band two on the basis of overcrowding. There is no fault in how the Council has considered Mrs X’s housing application in terms of severe overcrowding.
15. Mrs X believes she should be moved due to her disabilities and medical condition. In response to her complaints, the Council twice said the most recent medication information on file was from 2014. Mrs X sent medical information to the Council in January 2020 after the stage one complaint response was received. Therefore in the stage two complaint response dated 23 June 2020 the Council was wrong to say the only medical information it held was from 2014. This is fault.
16. However, the Council did say in an email dated 15 April 2020 that it had considered the GP letter dated 9 January 2020. Mrs X told the Council her current accommodation was unsuitable due to being accessed via stone steps. The Council said there was nothing in the evidence provided to indicate this made her current accommodation unsuitable. It also said that there was no occupational therapy report indicating Mrs X could not use the stairs and that her current accommodation was unsuitable.
17. I am aware Mrs X has asked the Council to refer her to an occupational therapist. It advised that she would need to contact her GP or Adult Social Care to get and occupational therapy assessment. I am aware Mrs X has not been able to get such a referral and that this is frustrating for her. However, I am not persuaded there is fault by the Council on this issue.
18. The Council did consider the new medical evidence provided in January 2020. It took the view this was not sufficient to give Mrs X a higher priority banding on medical grounds. Band two medical priority is awarded where an applicant or a member of their household is assessed as suffering from a serious medical condition which is being seriously affected by their current housing situation and that would be improved by moving to appropriate accommodation. After considering the letter dated January 2020 from Mrs X’s GP the Council took the view that there were not grounds to award urgent medical priority. It advised Mrs X that this decision could change if there was an occupational therapy assessment showing she was unable to use the stairs.
19. While I appreciate Mrs X would like to move and that she reports problems using the stairs, it is not fault for the Council to require further evidence to support this. I appreciate Mrs X has encountered difficulties obtaining an occupational therapy assessment but I am not persuaded this due to fault by the Council.
20. Mrs X also complains that the bidding system often shows that bids made are ineligible. The Council says that if there are no properties that Mrs X can bid on, the system will say that she is ineligible when she logs in. The Council has also provided details of the bids placed by Mrs X. This shows Mrs X placed seven bids in 2018 and only one in 2019. Mrs X’s highest position was 44. There is nothing to suggest any fault in the system or that Mrs X’s bids are not being registered if correctly made.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I will now complete my investigation as there is no evidence of fault causing a significant injustice in this case.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman