Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his housing matters. Mr X could bid for ground floor properties so the Council was not at fault. The Council was at fault for failing to inform Mr X of his right to a suitability review for his temporary accommodation. This did not cause him an injustice as he was already aware of the process. The Council was at fault for failing to record how it considered all relevant information when carrying out a review of his priority banding. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Mr X £200 and decide if it needs to carry out a new review of his priority banding to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X’s sister made a complaint on his behalf about the Council’s handling of his homelessness application. The complaint included the Council’s failure to:
• Consider all relevant information when reviewing Mr X’s priority banding; and
• Place him in a band where he could bid for ground floor properties.

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. 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. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended).
5. Some of Mr X’s complaint is late. He said he initially contacted the Council for housing assistance in 2019 but did not come to us until April 2025. There is no evidence Mr X could not have complained to us earlier about events before April 2024 and no good reasons to exercise discretion to go back further than 12 months. Therefore, I have investigated from April 2024.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr 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

Relevant law and guidance

Homelessness

8. 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.
9. If a council is satisfied an applicant is unintentionally homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation. This is called the main housing duty. The accommodation a council provides until it can end this duty is called temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
10. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of 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.

Housing allocations

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. 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))

13. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application/ a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme.
14. The Ombudsman recognises that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council for failing to re-house someone, if it has prioritised applicants and allocated properties according to its published allocations scheme.

The Council’s housing allocations policy

15. The Council’s Housing Register works on three different bands that determine how it will deal with a person’s application and any restrictions on the type of social properties they can apply for. Those placed in band 1A have the highest priority and those placed in band 1B have the second highest priority.
16. The criteria for band 1A includes but is not limited to the following:
• The Council awards the applicant emergency medical priority. This is the highest priority award and will normally be considered where the criteria for a priority medical award is met and one or more of the following conditions also applies:
1. someone is in hospital/residential care and cannot return home because it is not suitable;
2. there is a risk to life; or
3. there are very exceptional circumstances
• The Council awards the applicant priority for ground floor on medical or disability grounds following a medical assessment and recommendation by a health advisor.
17. The criteria for band 1B includes but it is not limited to the following:
• The Council awards the applicant medical priority following a health assessment and recommendation by a health advisor.
• This recommendation will normally be if the applicant has a severe long-term limiting illness or permanent and substantial disability. Health or quality of life must be severely affected by the place they live in now.

What happened

18. Mr X was homeless so approached the Council for assistance. Mr X has a physical disability and mental health conditions. The Council accepted the main housing duty in November 2023 and provided temporary accommodation (accommodation A) for Mr X. It also accepted a housing register application.
19. Mr X requested a suitability review of accommodation A. Mr X said he needed a ground floor flat both on physical and mental health grounds. In March 2024, the Council carried out an Occupational Therapy Housing Needs Assessment. The Occupational Therapist (OT) advised the Council of the following:
• Accommodation A was unsuitable and he required a self-contained flat;
• The flat would need to be ground floor if there was no lift because of his physical disability;
• His physical disability did not prevent him using a lift; and
• Whilst Mr X said he cannot live above the ground floor due to risks stemming from his mental health, it fell outside the OT’s scope to comment on this. Therefore, they recommended contacting Mr X’s psychiatrist or another mental health professional to get their expert opinion on the matter.
20. The Council decided the accommodation was unsuitable and moved him to new temporary accommodation (accommodation B) in April 2024. Accommodation B was a self-contained flat. The Council did not send Mr X a formal letter notifying him of his right to request a review of the suitability of accommodation B.
21. The same month, the Council awarded Mr X medical priority on its housing register and moved him into Band 1B from 2A. This was the second highest band.
22. In September 2024, Mr X raised a complaint and requested the Council place him in band 1A. The Council can place an applicant in band 1A if they have a medical need for a ground floor flat. Mr X said he could not bid for ground floor properties in band 1B.
23. In March 2025, the Council provided a final complaint response. The Council said the following:
• Mr X was moved from Band 2A to 1B in April 2024. The Council said it would backdate this to May 2022 when Mr X reapproached the Council for homelessness assistance.
24. In March 2025, Mr X again reiterated that he should be in band 1A. Mr X had provided two medical letters dated April 2024 and May 2025 confirming his need for a ground floor flat.
25. In May 2025, the Council decided to not award any additional medical priority. Mr X requested a review of this decision. The Council provided the review outcome in September 2025.
26. The Council upheld its decision to not award any additional priority for the following reasons:
• Mr X does not qualify for an emergency medical priority award because his living conditions were not posing a risk to his life and neither is he being prevented from being released from hospital or residential care as a result of having unsatisfactory living conditions;
• 121 one-bed ground floor flats were bid for and allocated to applicants in band 1B in the past three years. A further 94 were allocated to applicants in band 2A and 3. The Council said there was no evidence that being in band 1B has prevented him from being able to bid on ground floor flats; and
• The OT report from March 2024 set out clear reasons why they were not satisfied Mr X had a medical need for ground floor flat properties only.
27. Mr X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s handling of the matter and complained to us.
28. The Council has since provided evidence that Mr X has successfully bid on an above ground one-bedroom flat in September 2025. However, to date, Mr X has not moved in because of delays caused by the current occupant vacating the property. The Council said he can still bid on other properties in the meantime.

Council’s response to our enquiries

29. The Council said it does not accept being placed in band 1B has prevented him from being able to bid on ground floor properties. It said that, in the period April 2022 to March 2025, 121 one bedroom ground floor properties were allocated to applicants in band 1B.
30. The Council accepted it did not notify Mr X of his rights to a suitability review when it moved him from temporary accommodation A to B. The Council offers its apologies to Mr X. The Council said Mr X had legal representatives and sufficient family assistance who had previously requested suitability reviews of two prior temporary accommodations. It said if there was any issue with accommodation B they were aware of how to submit a review request so this did not place Mr X at a disadvantage.
31. The Council has confirmed that it did not get an expert opinion from a mental health professional as suggested by the OT to determine whether Mr X required a ground floor flat for mental health reasons. The Council has been unable to provide any records from the time justifying why it did not do this.

My findings

Right to a suitability review

32. When the Council decided temporary accommodation A was unsuitable, it should have sent him a formal offer letter for temporary accommodation B and outlined his right to a suitability review. The Council failed to do this which was fault. However, this did not cause Mr X an injustice as he had legal and family representatives who had already requested two suitability reviews prior. Therefore, on a balance of probabilities, they were aware they could request a suitability review on Mr X’s behalf if he was not happy with temporary accommodation B.

Not being able to bid on ground floor properties

33. Mr X said that he was unable to bid on ground floor properties in band 1B despite needing a ground floor property for his disabilities. The Council has confirmed Mr X is able to bid on ground floor properties whilst in band 1B and that other applicants in band 1B have successfully bid for ground floor one bedroom properties. The lack of ground floor properties showing to Mr X is likely due to a shortage in the areas Mr X is searching. The Council was not at fault for the lack of ground floor properties for Mr X to place a bid on in his preferred area.

Review of priority banding

34. Mr X said he required ground floor accommodation due to risks stemming from his mental conditions, so requested to be moved band 1A. The Council completed a review and decided to not award further priority. It said the OT report from March 2024 set out clear reasons why they were not satisfied Mr X had a medical need for ground floor flat properties only.
35. The OT said Mr X’s physical disability did not prevent him from having an above ground flat providing there was a lift. However, they could not comment on whether Mr X’s mental health conditions prevented this. Their advice was to get the expert opinion of a medical professional but the Council failed to do this. The Council also has no contemporaneous records justifying its reasons for not doing so. This was fault. This has caused Mr X distress, frustration and uncertainty about his priority banding.
36. We found fault with the Council on a similar case. Following this case the Council agreed to send us an action plan showing how it will ensure all housing review requests are recorded and completed. Therefore a further service improvement is not required.

Back to top

Action

37. Within one month of the final decision the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Mr X and pay him £200 for the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by its failure to record how it considered all relevant information when carrying out a review of his priority banding. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
2. Consider the Occupational Therapist’s advice, decide whether to get a further medical opinion and make a clear note of its rationale. If this results in the Council obtaining fresh medical evidence, and Mr X remains on its housing register, it should consider whether the new evidence affects Mr X’s priority banding and issue a decision in writing with review rights.
3. Remind relevant officers of the importance of sending a formal letter offering temporary accommodation that sets out relevant review rights.
38. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

39. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman