Summary: Miss D says the Council failed to properly inform her, and make reasonable adjustments, relating to a property viewing in 2024. I have found the Council at fault because it failed to keep records of contact with Miss D and has not evidenced that it ensured reasonable adjustments were made with a Property Agent. The Council has agreed to make service improvements and to pay Miss D redress for uncertainty.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Miss D) says the Council failed to inform her about the purpose of a property viewing in July 2024. Miss D thought she was viewing temporary accommodation, but it was for a two year private rental tenancy. Miss D says the Property Agent (Agent) had not been told in advance she had a visual impairment, and no reasonable adjustments were made. This resulted in Miss D signing up for two year tenancy without realising.

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 investigating whether the Council advised Miss D about the purpose of the June 2024 property viewing and if it sought reasonable adjustments with the Agent.
5. Miss D refers to issues with her housing register account. I have advised her this is a premature complaint, and she would need to first complain about this to the Council before she can bring that matter to the Ombudsman.
6. Miss D had a right to review if she considered the property she moved into in July 2024 was unsuitable, including whether it was suitable for her needs and affordable. The Ombudsman would expect a person to use that right of review.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Miss D and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. I shared my draft decision with parties and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

9. On 11 April 2024 Miss D applied to the Council as homeless. She advised the Council she had a visual impairment. On 16 April the Council accepted a relief duty towards Miss D. The Resettlement Move-on Officer (Officer) provided a personalised housing plan (PHP) which included information on how to find housing and some basic information about benefits.
10. On 12 June the Council accepted a main housing duty for Miss D. It wrote to her explaining she would receive one suitable offer of accommodation to discharge its duty. On 19 June the Officer emailed Miss D that she would let her know when two bedroom properties were available. On 20 June the Officer text Miss D that a property was available to view. Miss D attended a viewing of a flat the next day with the Agent. It appears she signed a tenancy agreement to rent the property for two years. On 21 June the Officer emailed the Agent that she had spoken to Miss D and she wanted to go ahead and rent the property. I have no notes of any telephone calls between the Officer and Miss D in June.
11. Miss D moved into the flat at the start of July. On 4 July she reported some issues with the property and the Officer asked the Agent to resolve these the next day. On 5 July the Council wrote to Miss D that it had ended its main housing duty because she had accepted the tenancy. It explained she had a right to review the decision within 21 days. At the end of July Miss D raised concerns about the affordability of the property and the Officer said they were happy to liaise with Miss D’s Universal Credit Work Coach to assist her.
12. On 1 October Miss D complained to the Council. She said she could only see a small amount of text where it was enlarged. When she went to view the property in June, she had spoken to the Officer who advised it was to view temporary accommodation and sign a contract. Miss D said the Agent had not been told about her visual impairment and no reasonable adjustments had been made, such as letting her photograph the tenancy agreement so a friend could read it for her. Miss D had signed the tenancy thinking it was for temporary accommodation and not realising it was a two year tenancy which she could not afford.
13. The Council replied on 10 December that it considered the rent was affordable. The Officer had advised the Agent of Miss D’s disability and Miss D had not raised any concerns at the time about the property. Miss D asked the Council to escalate her complaint on 19 December. She said no reasonable adjustments had been made when she was asked to sign the tenancy contract. The Council issued its final stage complaints response on 13 February 2025. It confirmed the Council had been aware of Miss D’s disability and had used emails and telephone calls without any issues. Before the viewing the Officer had advised Miss D not to sign any documents because the Council was waiting for compliance information from the Agent.

What should have happened

The relief duty

14. 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)

The main housing duty

15. 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)

Review rights

16. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the decisions including the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation offered under section 200(3) and section 193). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.

The Council’s processes

17. The Council should note an applicant’s disability on the PHP and make any required reasonable adjustments. When the Council accepts a main housing duty towards an applicant it notifies them that it will make one suitable offer of accommodation to discharge its duty.
18. The Council says it will notify property agents about an applicant’s disability and any reasonable adjustments needed prior to viewings to discharge the main housing duty. The Council does not usually provide applicants with a viewing for temporary accommodation. Viewings are arranged for long-term housing to discharge the main housing duty.

Was there fault by the Council

19. The Council says the Officer advised Miss D not to sign anything at the property viewing in June 2024. The Council also says the Officer told the Agent about Miss D’s visual impairment before the viewing. I have no evidence to show those actions happened. There is no contemporaneous note on the case log. The Council accepts there are no supporting records and says most of the communication between the Officer and Miss D was verbal. The Officer is currently away from work. In the absence of evidence to show the Officer notified the Agent that Miss D had a visual impairment I find the Council at fault. In addition, I also find fault because there is no evidence to show Miss D was advised not to sign a tenancy agreement.
20. We expect a reasonable record of communications with an applicant is made by the Council, particularly where the applicant has a visual impairment and is having more telephone contact than usual. The absence of records of conversations in this case is a fault by the Council.
21. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the relevant available evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened. In this case Miss D says she was told the viewing in June was for temporary accommodation. I find that unlikely because the Council does not usually offer viewings for temporary accommodation and the Agent used in this case only supplied long-term rentals, not temporary accommodation. Furthermore, the Council had already written to Miss D explaining it would make one suitable offer of long-term accommodation to discharge its duty. Taking all these factors into account, I find it probable the Council did not advise Miss D the viewing was for temporary accommodation, and it is not at fault on this point.

Did the fault cause an injustice

22. There is no evidence to show what advice Miss D received prior to her viewing the property in June. There is also no evidence the Council sought reasonable adjustments with the Agent. This means there is an uncertainty for Miss D about the service she received.

Back to top

Action

23. To remedy the injustice to Miss D the Council agrees to my recommendation and will pay Miss D £150 for the uncertainty caused by the faults I have identified.
24. The Council will also consider service improvements because of this case including reminding officers (and providing training or guidance if needed) about documenting telephone calls with applicants and relevant third parties and to ensure reasonable adjustments are in place for applicants.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions within four weeks of this case closing.

Back to top

Decision

26. I find fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman