Summary: There is no fault in how the Council handled Mr X’s application to the housing register or his homelessness. The Council’s delay in responding to Mr X’s complaint is fault. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Mr X £150, and take action to improve its service.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his housing application. In particular, that the Council:
• required him to reapply to the housing register when its policy changed in September 2021;
• required him to provide information that he had already provided in his first application in March 2021;
• refused to take a homeless application because he would not provide address details he did not have permission to share;
• delayed processing his application to the housing register
2. Mr X also complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint. He says the Council’s communication was consistently poor and it never responded to his complaint.
3. As a result, Mr X says he has been to significant time and trouble trying to resolve his complaint and has lost time on the housing register.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. We cannot question whether an organisation’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)
6. 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(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I spoke to Mr X about the complaint.
8. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
9. I referred to the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
10. Mr X and the organisation now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Housing allocations

Allocations scheme

11. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing.  All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
12. The Council places applicants who qualify to join the housing register in a priority band. Applicants in emergency and Gold band are those with the greatest housing need. Other applicants are placed in either Silver or Bronze band.

What happened

13. Mr X applied to join the Council’s housing register in December 2020.
14. In February 2021, the Council asked Mr X for documents in support of his application. In particular, it asked Mr X to prove his identity and that he had a local connection to the Council’s area.
15. In March, the Council decided Mr X had not proved he had a local connection to the area. Mr X complained, and provided further documents. The Council reassessed Mr X’s application and confirmed that he had a local connection through his employment. It awarded him Silver band.
16. In June, the Council advised Mr X by letter that it had adopted a new allocations scheme. It said applicants in Silver band and below would have to resubmit their applications in September.
17. In September, Mr X re-submitted his application. The Council wrote to him in October to say there was a delay processing the reapplications.
18. In February 2022, the Council wrote to Mr X. It said it needed him to provide documents in support of his application. In particular, it needed Mr X to provide:
• identification;
• proof of local connection;
• proof of savings; and
• evidence to show why he had a housing need.
19. It said if Mr X had not provided this information within 28 days, it would cancel his application.
20. Mr X did not provide the information requested. The Council cancelled his application to the housing register in April.

My findings

21. The Council is entitled to introduce a new allocations scheme. It was for the Council to decide how to migrate existing applicants over to the new scheme. There is no fault in its decision to have applicants in Silver band and below make a new application.
22. Therefore, there is no fault in the Council requiring Mr X to make a new application in September 2021.
23. Mr X says the Council already had all the information it needed to make a decision about his new application, since his circumstances had not changed since he applied in March 2021.
24. However, the Council had to assess Mr X’s application in line with its new scheme. This had different criteria and it needed Mr X to provide up to date information to confirm he qualified under the new scheme. This is not fault.
25. The Council’s letter in February 2022 set out the information it needed. It was up to Mr X to provide it. He did not do so and so the Council cancelled his application. This is not fault.

Homelessness

Law and guidance

26. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
27. If someone contacts a council seeking accommodation or assistance to obtain accommodation and gives ‘reason to believe’ that they may be homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, the council has a duty to make inquiries to satisfy itself whether any other duties are owed to that person. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)

What happened

28. Mr X approached the Council as homeless in January 2021. He said that he was sofa-surfing following a relationship breakdown. The Council’s records show that it asked Mr X for details of his address history. Mr X refused to provide the address of his ex-partner, his most recent settled address.
29. The Council advised Mr X that it needed this information so it could make inquiries and establish if it owed him any duties under the Housing Act 1996. Mr X said he could not provide this information and so the Council took no further action.
30. In August, the Council contacted Mr X about his housing circumstances. The Council explained that it would need his ex-partner’s address and telephone number. The Council’s records say that Mr X became hostile and asked to speak a manager.
31. Mr X says he does not have permission from his ex-partner to provide her address or contact details to the Council.

My findings

32. The law says that when a council has reason to believe someone may be homeless, it has a duty to make inquiries and establish what, if any, duty it owes.
33. One of the first questions a council must consider in this process is whether the applicant is homeless. The Code of Guidance says councils should ask applicants for the information necessary to assess this. It says “this will usually include enquiring into their accommodation history at least as far back as their last settled address, and the events that led to them…becoming homeless.” (Homelessness Code of Guidance 11.8)
34. There is no fault in the Council asking Mr X to provide the information about his ex-partner’s address. This information was necessary for the Council to satisfy itself that he was homeless.

Complaints

The Council’s policy and guidance

35. The Council’s complaint handling policy says it will:
• acknowledge all complaints within three working days.
• respond to complaints at stage one within 20 working days.
• keep complainants informed about any delays.
36. The guidance also says the Council should check that the complaints process is the right way of dealing with the matter. It says if there is a separate appeal process or review then this should be pursued instead. It should advise the complainant accordingly.

What happened

37. Mr X complained to the Council in March 2021 about his housing register application. The Council dealt with this as a review of its decision that he didn’t have a local connection.
38. Mr X complained again in August. The Council acknowledged this complaint in September and said it would respond by 16 September.
39. The Council sent Mr X a stage one complaint response in January 2022.
40. In the intervening months, Mr X contacted the Council at least five times to ask for a response to his complaint.

My findings

41. It was not fault for the Council to treat Mr X’s complaint in March 2021 as a request for a review of its decision about his housing register application. This was the appropriate way to resolve Mr X’s complaint and is in line with the Council’s complaint handling guidance.
42. However, the Council should have made it clear to Mr X that this is the approach it had taken. There is no evidence it explained to Mr X that it had decided to treat his complaint as a review request. This is fault. It caused Mr X avoidable frustration, since he thought the Council had ignored his complaint. This is an injustice to Mr X.
43. The Council is also at fault for its handling of Mr X’s complaint in August.
44. It should have acknowledged the complaint within three days. It took two weeks for the Council to acknowledge Mr X’s complaint. This is fault.
45. The Council should have responded to Mr X’s complaint within 20 working days. It took the Council 107 working days to respond. This is a delay of 87 days and is fault.
46. In that time, Mr X went to significant time and trouble chasing the Council for a response to his complaint. This is an injustice to Mr X.

Back to top

Agreed action

47. To remedy the injustice to Mr X from the fault I have identified the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Mr X in writing
• Pay Mr X £150 in recognition of his avoidable frustration and time and trouble
48. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
49. The Council should also take the following action to improve its services:
• Share this decision with staff in the relevant departments.
• Remind relevant staff to ensure complainants are informed when it is decided to deal with a complaint as a request for a review or appeal.
• Remind relevant staff of the importance of responding to complaints in a timely manner and keeping the complainant informed of any delay.
50. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken within eight weeks of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

51. I have completed my investigation. There is some fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman