Summary: Ms X complained about the way the Council handled her homelessness and housing register applications. We found some fault with how it handled Ms X’s homelessness application and how it decided her priority on the housing register. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to Ms X to recognise the distress caused.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the way the Council handled her housing register and homelessness applications. Ms X said she had to live in unsafe accommodation and this negatively affected her and her disabled child’s health.

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 the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

7. 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.
8. If a council is satisfied an applicant is threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, it must take steps to help the applicant keep their home or find somewhere new to live. This is called the Prevention Duty. In deciding what steps to take, a council must have regard to its assessment of the applicant’s case. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
9. Once a council is satisfied someone is homeless it must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation. This is called the Relief Duty. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
10. A council must secure accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. This is called interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
11. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need and is not homeless intentionally, the council has a duty to make accommodation available. This is called the Main Housing Duty. Accommodation a council provides until it can end this duty is called temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
12. 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))
13. An allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants in the following categories:

• homeless people;
• people in insanitary, overcrowded or unsatisfactory housing;
• people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds;
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others;
  (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(3))

14. The Council’s Housing Allocations Scheme places applicants into Bands based on their priority. Band 1 is for applicants with the highest priority and Band 4 is for those with no housing need.
15. Homelessness applicants owed the Prevention, Relief and Main housing duties are placed into Band 2. Those with medical issues which are worsened by their housing are also placed into Band 2.
16. To qualify for Band 1 on medical grounds applicants need to have a urgent need to move due to medical issues which are being worsened by their current housing situation. This includes risk to life or where an applicant’s current accommodation directly contributes to causing critical ill-health.

What happened

17. Ms X lived in private rented accommodation. She has a disabled child.
18. In April 2023, Ms X made a homelessness application to the Council after her landlord gave ger a section 21 notice to leave her accommodation. The Council completed an assessment with Ms X and decided in early May 2023 it owed her the Prevention Duty.
19. As part of the Prevention Duty the Council referred Ms X to its private sector renting team for help finding accommodation in the private sector. The Council also spoke with Ms X’s landlord who had recently purchased the property from her previous landlord. The new landlord agreed Ms X could stay at the property if they could increase the rent. The Council negotiated a rent increase and considered Ms X’s affordability when deciding whether she could afford the rent increase.
20. In early September 2023, the Council wrote to Ms X and told her it had ended its Prevention Duty. The Council said it had helped prevent Ms X’s homelessness and she was able to remain in her current accommodation.
21. In October 2023, Ms X contacted the Council again. Ms X told the Council her landlord threatened to evict her and made other threats against her. The Council re-opened Ms X’s homelessness case and decided to owe her the Relief Duty.
22. In October 2023, the Council made Ms X two offers of accommodation in the private sector. Ms X refused these offers. Ms X refused the first property as it was a maisonette not a house and the second due to inappropriate questioning from the landlord when she viewed the property. In late October 2023, Ms X told the Council she did not want to move to private rented accommodation as she could be homeless again in 12 months.
23. In December 2023, Ms X moved out of her house and went to stay with her mother. Ms X said she was sleeping in the living room with her child. The Council made Ms X an offer of accommodation in the private sector in December 2023. Ms X refused this offer as the accommodation was too close to where she used to live and she did not want to be near to her old landlord. Ms X said she had been threatened by this landlord.
24. In January 2024, Ms X applied to join the Council’s housing register. The Council carried out a medical assessment for Ms X’s housing register application in March 2024 and decided it needed more information before it could review her Banding.
25. In March 2024, the Council decided it owed Ms X the Main Housing Duty. The Council also placed Ms X in Band two on its housing register as it owed her this duty.
26. In May 2024, the Council carried out two medical assessments of Ms X’s circumstances to decide what Band she should be on the housing register. Both times the Council said it considered Band two was correct for her households medical needs. Ms X asked the Council to review this decision.
27. On 24 May 2024, Ms X had a telephone call with the Council and told her caseworker she did not want to move to private rented accommodation and would rather stay at her mother’s house until she got an offer of social housing. The Council told her it could take between 2-5 years to obtain accommodation on the housing register.
28. In June 2024, the Council sent Ms X its review decision on her housing register Band. The Council upheld its decision to place Ms X into Band two.
29. Ms X complained to the Council in June 2024 about the way it handled her housing situation and the level of help she received. Ms X was unhappy about the offers of private rented accommodation the Council made and felt these were unsuitable. Ms X also complained about her level of priority on the Council’s housing register. Ms X believed she should be in Band one.
30. The Council provided its final response to her complaint in September 2024. The Council said:
• Ms X did not receive the level of service in terms of response times to her communication she should have between April and August 2023 and apologised.
• It was right that it contacted her landlord about the rent increase as it was trying to prevent her homelessness. The Council said it believed the property was suitable as Ms X had lived here for over 10 years. The Council said it managed to negotiate the landlord down so the rent increase was not as much as the landlord first wanted.
• There was a delay contacting Ms X from October 2023 to December 2023. The Council said it did not believe this caused injustice to Ms X as she was staying at her mother’s house. The Council said it would make improvements around the time taken to reassign homelessness cases.
• There was a delay initially processing Ms X’s housing register application she made in January 2024, as it took until April 2024 to do this. The Council said Ms X would not have been re-housed in the intervening period.
• It considered her Banding on the housing register was correct. The Council said it considered whether Ms X’s household had medical priority and decided she fell into Band two not Band one.
• The Council offered Ms X £500 to recognise the time and trouble she experienced contacting the housing teams.
31. Ms X remained dissatisfied and complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

Homelessness application

32. When Ms X applied as homeless in April 2023, the Council decided to owe her the Prevention Duty. As part of trying to prevent her homelessness the Council spoke with her landlord who was trying to increase the rent and negotiated a new rent which meant she could continue living there. At the time I am satisfied the Council considered whether this property was suitable for Ms X. It looked at the fact Ms X had lived there for over ten years. In addition it had not received the reports she later made against her landlord at this stage. I do not consider the Council was at fault for how it dealt with Ms X here.
33. When Ms X made reports to the Council about threatening behaviour from her landlord and being told to leave her property, the Council re-opened her case and decided to owe Ms X the Relief Duty. As part of the relief duty the Council made several offers of permanent accommodation in the private sector. It is clear there is a disagreement between Ms X and the Council about the suitability of these properties. But I cannot see that the Council offered Ms X any interim accommodation from October 2024, or any temporary accommodation once it decided it owed her the Main Housing Duty in March 2024. Failure to do so was fault.
34. While I have found the Council at fault on this point, I do not consider it caused Ms X injustice. This is because Ms X told the Council in May 2024 that she wanted to wait for an offer of social housing and did not want other accommodation. Therefore if the Council had offered Ms X temporary accommodation I consider it likely on balance she would not have accepted this.
35. There were delays in contacting Ms X between April 2023 and August 2023 and October 2023 to December 2023. The Council has acknowledged this in its complaint response and offered Ms X a financial remedy. I consider this is suitable to remedy the injustice caused to Ms X and is in line with what we would recommend.

Housing register application

36. The Council has recognised there was a delay in processing Ms X’s housing register from when she applied in January 2024 until when she was placed into Band two in March 2024. The Council has recognised this and offered Ms X a financial remedy. I consider this is suitable to remedy the injustice caused to Ms X and is in line with what we would recommend.
37. The Council should have placed Ms X onto its housing register in May 2023, when it decided to owe her the Prevention Duty. Failure to do so was fault. This meant Ms X missed the chance to be considered for properties which came up from March 2023 onwards. Given the Council’s current wait times for accommodation are between two and five years I consider on balance Ms X would not have missed out on an offer of accommodation through the housing register. In addition, there is the possibility Ms X could have been removed from the register after her homelessness case was closed and then placed on it again in October 2023 when the Council owed her the Relief Duty.
38. The Council has decided to backdate Ms X’s start date for her housing register application to May 2023. Therefore I do not consider Ms X has been disadvantaged by these errors.
39. Ms X also complained about the way the Council decided she should have been placed into Band two based on her household’s medical issues. Ms X believes she should be placed into Band one. The Council has shown that it considered Ms X’s medical circumstances in May 2024. However, I cannot see any records as to how the Council made the decision or what factors it considered when deciding Band two was appropriate. This was fault.
40. While the Council was at fault for initially not explaining its decision to Ms X, I am satisfied it has properly explained this in its June 2024 review decision. The Council explained why it considered Band two was suitable for Ms X’s household and why she was not eligible for Band one. While Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision, I am satisfied the Council considered Ms X circumstances and made its decision in line with its allocations policy.

Back to top

Agreed Action

41. Within one month of my final decision the Council agreed to carry out the following:
• Apologise to Ms X for the above faults We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• If it has not done so already, pay Ms X the £500 it offered her during the complaints process.
• Ensure in future the Council keeps records of its rational for initial medical priority decisions for housing register applications, so it can evidence why it has placed someone in a particular Band based on medical needs.
42. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

43. I find fault causing injustice. The Council agreed to the above actions to remedy injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman