Summary: There is fault by the Council. The Council closed homeless applications without telling Mrs X, delayed processing her homeless application and failed to update her application with her medical requirements. The Council has apologised and ensured that Mrs X’s bidding priority and requirements are correct. It has also provided a payment towards her time and trouble and the time she has spent in unsuitable accommodation. Mrs X has now been rehoused.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mrs X, complains that she has missed out on offers of housing due to delays by the Council when processing her housing application. The Council has apologised and has ensured she can bid for suitable properties. But, Mrs X thinks she has missed out on suitable housing because of the delays.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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

4. I read the papers put in by Mrs X.
5. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
6. Mrs X and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
8. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
9. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)

Key facts

10. Mrs X lived with her brother for over 10 years. Her brother helps her with filling in forms as English is not her first language. In July 2019 she said her brother had asked her to leave as the house was overcrowded in an initial homeless assessment with the Council. The Council noted Mrs X had difficulty with stairs and had several medical conditions.
11. The Council said that notes of a telephone conversation in August 2019 said ‘Mrs X’s brother was happy for Mrs X to continue living there until she was found more suitable accommodation’. On 6 August 2019 the Council accepted the relief duty towards Mrs X and emailed her a medical assessment form.
12. The Council closed the case on 6 September 2019 as Mrs X made no further contact.
13. In September 2020 Mrs X’s family contacted the Council again. The housing officer contacted Mrs X’s brother in November 2020 and asked him to help Mrs X complete a medical assessment form.
14. The Council closed the case on 5 January 2021 as Mrs X made no further contact.
15. Mrs X’s family asked about getting a disabled facilities grant to alter her brothers home to make it more suitable for her. This application was stopped when Mrs X moved to her sister’s flat in May 2021.
16. Mrs X contacted the housing department again in October 2021. The Council’s medical officer assessed her medical evidence and said that she needed ground floor accommodation or a flat with a lift.
17. The Council issued a personalised housing plan (PHP) on 27 October 2021. Mrs X’s representatives contacted the Council several times over the next few months. The Council apologised for the delay in progressing her homeless application in February 2022.
18. The Council accepted the main homeless duty towards Mrs X on 20 April 2022.
19. Mrs X made an official complaint. In August 2022 the Council said the Council’s system was automatically bidding for her but Mrs X had declined viewing properties she was shortlisted for as they had too many steps.
20. The Council responded fully to Mrs X’s complaint in September 2022. It identified the following faults:
• The Council closed Mrs X’s housing applications in September 2019 and January 2021 without telling her and before 56 days had elapsed. (Guidance says is it reasonable to consider a homeless application closed if the applicant does not respond in 56 days.)
• There were delays in processing Mrs X’s homeless application from October 2021 onwards and delay responding to her complaint first made in June 2022.
21. The Council apologised, offered £1500 compensation and backdated Mrs X’s priority date to 29 October 2021 when it received the completed forms.
22. Mrs X was permanently rehoused on 28 October 2022.

My analysis

23. The Council has investigated Mrs X’s complaint and has said it was at fault. Mrs X has complained to the Ombudsman as:
• She believes the Council should have offered her interim accommodation from July 2019 onwards.
• She could not bid for accommodation from July 2019 onwards.
• She was offered accommodation that was not suitable for her as it had stairs as the Council did not update her application with her medical needs until September 2022.
• She has missed out on offers of accommodation.
24. The Council has accepted it was at fault, as it closed her homeless applications in September 2019 and January 2021 without telling her and before it should have done.
25. Mrs X says that she believes that this meant the Council did not offer her interim accommodation when it should have done. From the information I have, Mrs X was still living with her brother, who had said that she could stay, so I do not consider the Council felt offering interim accommodation was needed. This is supported by the fact that Mrs X’s family were considering altering the property to suit her needs using a disabled facilities grant.
26. Mrs X also complains that she was not able to bid for accommodation from July 2019 onwards. While the Council should not have closed the homeless applications, I do think it would have been reasonable for Mrs X to pursue this at the time by making a complaint then. The Council would not have closed the complaint if Mrs X had returned the forms or contacted the Council. So, I do not believe Mrs X missed out on being able to bid, purely because of the Council’s fault.
27. From October 2021 onwards, the Council accepts it was at fault, in that it delayed processing Mrs X’s homeless application and delayed updating her records to show that she needed ground floor or flats with lift access.
28. In order to remedy the fault the Council has apologised, updated her records and backdated her priority date till October 2021.
29. The Council has offered Mrs X £1500 compensation. Mrs X has said that she believes that she has missed out on offers of accommodation during this time.
30. The Council has said there are 10 properties that may have suitable for Mrs X that were offered to applicants with lower priority dates than hers. However, there is still some uncertainty if she would have been offered or accepted the properties due to the way the allocation system works. So, while we cannot say for certain, it is clear there is a real possibility Mrs X could have been housed sooner if the Council’s fault had occurred.
31. Mrs X has now been rehoused. So, I have to consider if the £1500 remedy already offered is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedy guidance.
32. Our remedy guidance says ‘where a complainant has been deprived of suitable accommodation during what would inevitably have been a stressful period in their life, our recommendation is likely to be in the range of £150 to £350 per month’.
33. In this case, Mrs X had lived with her brother until May 2021, so while I appreciate she was unsettled at this point, I am not convinced that she was deprived of suitable accommodation at this point. This is because she had been living at this address since 2006.
34. However, from May 2021 onwards Mrs X moved in with her sister and so it is clear at this point she was no longer in settled accommodation. So, from October 2021 onwards, when Mrs X contacted the Council again and she may have missed out on offers of accommodation, I consider a monthly remedy payment is appropriate. From the information I have, Mrs X can live with family and so a payment at the lower end of the remedy scale is reasonable. So, at the date of writing this report Mrs X has spent 13 months waiting for accommodation, which could possibly have been avoided if the fault had not occurred. This makes £1950 (13 x £150).
35. I also consider Mrs X is due a payment for her families considerable time and trouble when contacting the Council and making complaints. This has been made worse by the fact that Mrs X needs help interpreting documents from her brother and the process may have been easier for her if the Council had established if she needed reasonable adjustments, such as documents translated. So, I recommend the Council pays her an extra £500 towards her time and trouble and contacts her to ensure that any reasonable adjustments needed are recorded on her file for the future.

Back to top

Agreed action

36. Within one month of the date of the decision on this complaint the Council should:
• Apologise to Mrs X.
• Write to Mrs X to ask her if she requires any reasonable adjustments to be made to help her when she contacts the Council and confirm any arrangements in writing.
• Pay Mrs X £2450 (instead of the £1500 already offered, not in addition to it).
37. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

38. I have completed my investigation of this complaint. This complaint is upheld, as there was fault by the Council and I consider the remedy outlined above remedies the injustice to Mrs X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman