Summary: Mr D complains the Council delaying making a direct offer of accommodation. I have found the Council followed the correct process. There was some minor delay which did not result in a significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Mr D) says the Council has failed to provide him with a direct offer of accommodation sooner. Mr D also says the Council has wrongly decided he is eligible for a three bedroom property; he wants a four bedroom home. He also believes the Council have awarded secure tenancies to applicants who have a lower housing priority in breach of the Allocations Policy.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

4. I am not investigated Mr D’s complaint about his bedroom eligibility. That is because the Council correctly advised him about the bedroom entitlement process. There is no fault in this matter, and an investigation would not add to the information already provided to Mr D by the Council.
5. I have investigated what happened from September 2023, which is 12 months prior to Mr D’s complaint, through to February 2025 when the Allocations Panel considered his case. Events after that date would need to be complained about to the Council in the first instance before Mr D can bring them to the Ombudsman. If Mr D believes the direct offer of housing in 2025 was unsuitable, he has a statutory right of review which should be used, he can then progress that matter to court.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr D and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. I shared my draft decision with both parties. Mr D contacted me about advice on how to progress his review rights with the Council but did not tell me any new evidence on the case to alter my view.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

8. From September 2023 to 7 September 2024 Mr D did not contact the Council about his accommodation or request a direct offer of housing. The main contact with the Council in this period related to rent matters.
9. On 8 September 2024 Mr D sent the Council a complaint. He said he had been on the housing register for too long and was never successful when bidding. He believed people with a lower housing priority had been allocated housing before him. He asked the Council to refer him to the Allocations Panel to consider if he was eligible for a direct offer of housing. The Council replied on 22 September. It said Mr D did not meet the criteria for a referral to the Allocations Panel. Mr D subsequently asked the Council to escalate his complaint and reconsider the referral request. The Council replied on 18 November that it was not obliged to make a direct offer, but given Mr D had been in temporary accommodation for over 13 years it accepted the case should be considered by the Allocations Panel to decide if a direct offer could be made.
10. On 6 December the Allocations Panel considered Mr D’s case and noted that he had been waiting longer than average for a property. It agreed to make a direct offer. The Council notified Mr D by telephone of the decision the following week. In February 2025 Mr D asked for confirmation of the decision and the Council wrote to him on 4 February that he would receive a direct offer for a three bedroom property when something suitable was available.

Events outside my investigation

11. The Council made a direct offer to Mr D in July.

What should have happened

12. The Council’s Allocations Policy says that in exceptional cases the Council can make a direct offer of accommodation to applicants in temporary accommodation to minimise the cost and reduce the time a household spend in temporary accommodation. The decision on whether to make a direct offer of housing sits with the Allocations Panel. The Council says there are some events which would trigger a caseworker to make a referral to the Allocations Panel such as an applicant requiring an urgent move to flee violence or where a lease is ending and will not be renewed. Where an applicant requests the Council make a referral the Council will take account of the applicant’s circumstances including how long they have been in temporary accommodation and how regularly they bid for advertised properties.
13. If the Allocations Panel agree to a direct offer the Council will then look for a suitable property and make a formal offer to the applicant. Usually only one suitable offer will be made.
14. The Council operates a choice based lettings system whereby housing register applicants bid for advertised homes. The Council will usually award the property to the applicant with the highest level assessed housing priority and earliest priority date. There can be exceptions to this, for example where a property is ringfenced for people with a disability who require an adapted home.

Was there fault by the Council

15. Mr D says he has been in temporary accommodation for too long. I have looked at whether the Council should have referred him to the Allocations Panel sooner than November 2024. The evidence shows me that from September 2023 to early September 2024 Mr D did not make contact requesting a referral or raising issues that would prompt the Council to consider a referral. Mr D asked the Council to consider a referral in September. The Council incorrectly refused initially but after Mr D pursued his complaint it agreed to send the case to the Allocations Panel. The Council could have agreed the referral in its 22 September response given it had the full facts of the case available. There was a moderate delay of just under two months.
16. Mr D believes the Council awarded some of the properties he bid on to applicants with a lower housing need. The evidence I have seen shows that is not the case. The properties Mr D has bid on in 2024 and early 2025 were allocated to applicants with either a higher housing need or an earlier priority date. There is no fault in this matter.

Did the fault cause an injustice

17. There was a delay of just under two months agreeing to refer the case to the Allocations Panel. Mr D had to pursue his complaint, but I also note he was complaining about other matters so would likely have escalated the complaint even if the Council agreed to the referral request. I do not see the fault by the Council resulted in a significant injustice that requires a remedy by the Council.

Back to top

Decision

18. I find fault not causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman