Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to house Ms Y and her family in suitable temporary accommodation. This was an injustice, for which the Council has already offered a suitable remedy. The Council was also at fault for giving Ms Y wrong information, which caused her avoidable frustration. The Council will apologise for this.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained her family, Ms Y and her children, have been living in unsuitable temporary accommodation for ten years due to inaction by the Council. Ms X said the accommodation is unsuitable due to significant damp and mould and anti-social behaviour locally, which has led to harassment and criminal damage. Ms X said the Council failed to make sufficient efforts to move her relatives to suitable accommodation and as a result they have been caused distress, their health has been affected, and their belongings have been damaged.

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. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
4. 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)
5. 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

6. Ms X complained to the Ombudsman in April 2025, about matters dating back to 10 years previously. However, 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)
7. The period up to April 2024 is late and I have seen no good reason why Ms X did not complain to us sooner so I will not investigate it. Throughout the ten-year period she complains about, Ms X and another of Ms Y’s relatives were in frequent communication with the Council about Ms Y’s housing. Given this, it was reasonable to expect them to have complained to the Council and then to the Ombudsman if they remained unhappy.
8. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. For that reason, we normally end our investigations at the date the organisation issued its final response to a person’s complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
9. The Council sent Ms X its final response to her complaint in late February 2025 so I have investigated the period April 2024 to February 2025.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance and our guidance on remedies published on our website.
11. 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

Relevant law and guidance

The main housing duty

12. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the Code) set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
13. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need, the council has a duty to make accommodation available. The accommodation councils provide after they accept a main housing duty is called temporary accommodation. Councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)

Accommodation suitability

14. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)

Housing allocations

15. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme which enables applicants on its social housing register to bid for available properties which it advertises.
16. 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))
17. The Council’s 2024 allocation scheme sets out that when someone applies to join its housing register, it places them in a priority group. Within those groups, it assigns applicants a points total. Applicants with more points have greater priority. In general, when bidding on a property has closed, the Council allocates it to the applicant with the highest points total. If more than one applicant bid with the same points total, the property goes to the person who has been on the social housing register for the longest.
18. The priority groups include people who:
• Are homeless and owed the main housing duty. The people in this group can have between 150 and 460 points, depending on their circumstances. If someone has been living in the Council’s area for ten consecutive years, they get 50 extra points. Additional points can be added if, for example, the person has been in work for at least two years, or if they are a member of the armed forces;
• Are living in overcrowded accommodation. People in this group have between 100 and 360 points;
• Have a medical need to move. Points can range from 200-350; and
• Have a “pressing housing need”. This includes people who are waiting for a management transfer. This is where the Council has decided there are good management reasons to move a person to different accommodation. It is only available to existing Council tenants. People in this group have points between 400 and 450.
19. Homeless applicants cannot receive points relating to other priority groups. This means if a homeless applicant is overcrowded or has a medical need to move, they can still only have up to the maximum number of points within the homeless priority group.
20. The Council can choose to make properties only available to certain priority groups if it decides it has not let enough properties to people in those groups so far in the year.
21. The Council places an applicant in one of four mobility categories. When advertising a property, the Council specifies what mobility category it is suitable for. If someone applies for a property with a lower mobility category than they have been assessed as needing, the Council is likely to refuse to let the property to that person. The categories are:
• One- people who permanently need a wheelchair all the time;
• Two- people who need a wheelchair accessible home but who may not need to use the wheelchair inside the home;
• Three- applicants with severe mobility problems that need a ground floor or lifted property without internal stairs; and
• Four- all other applicants.
22. The Council’s 2024 scheme sets out it may make a direct offer when it decides it would be inappropriate for an applicant to bid for properties. The scheme lists examples of when the Council might come to that decision.

What happened

23. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
24. In the 2010’s the Council added Ms X to its housing register and decided she needed to live in a mobility category three property because she could not manage stairs.
25. By April 2024, the Council owed Ms Y the main housing duty and she was living in temporary accommodation. Ms Y had 200 points within the homelessness priority group because she was owed the duty and had lived in the Council’s area for 10 years continuously. Ms X feels Ms Y should also have points for having a medical need to move because she and her children have long-term health needs. Ms X also thinks Ms Y should have more points because she needs a three-bedroom property and was in a two-bed.
26. In April, the Council decided Ms Y needed to move to different accommodation because people in the local area were being anti-social to her and her family. The Council said it had put Ms Y on the list for a management transfer.
27. Records show Ms Y wanted a property which was not in a block of flats, because of her mental health. Ms Y also wanted to remain in the borough she was already living in. Ms Y was clear she would not accept a property outside of that area because she wanted to be near her family for support and near her children’s schools.
28. In July 2024, Ms X told the Council Ms Y could manage internal stairs and so should not have medical category three.
29. At the end of the month, the Council confirmed Ms Y was not eligible for a management transfer.
30. In September, Ms X asked the Council whether Ms Y could move into some properties she had identified as suitable. The Council said that was not possible because those properties were only for people in different priority groups to Ms Y’s.
31. Following a complaint from Ms X, the Council sent its stage one response to her complaint in December 2024. It agreed Ms Y had been living in unsuitable accommodation since April 2024 and offered her £1350 to reflect that. That amounts to £150 per month. In February 2025, after Ms X asked for a stage two response to her complaint, the Council increased its offer to £1650 because two more months had passed since its original offer.
32. In response to our enquiries, the Council said:
• Between April 2024 and February 2025, no three-bed social housing became available in the area Ms Y wanted to live in;
• It accepted it should have reviewed Ms Y’s mobility category when it heard Ms Y could manage indoor stairs. The Council said it had agreed to move Ms Y to mobility category four, which would increase the number of properties she could bid on;
• However, even if Ms Y had mobility category four during the period I have investigated, she would not have been able to bid successfully on a property. This was because the category four properties the Council let during that period went to applicants with greater priority than Ms Y or were properties she would not accept because they were in a block of flats or outside of her preferred area.

Findings

33. Ms X is unhappy Ms Y has not been able to move into social housing. However, the Council must allocate properties according to its social housing allocations scheme. The Council decided Ms Y was owed 200 points in the homeless priority group on its housing register. There is no evidence she was eligible for the additional points possible within that group. While Ms X feels Ms Y should have additional points for medical reasons and because she is overcrowded, those points are not available for homeless applicants owed the main housing duty. The Council was not at fault.
34. Ms Y was not eligible for a management transfer because she was not a Council tenant. The Council was not at fault for not moving Ms Y as part of a management transfer. It was, nonetheless, at fault for mistakenly telling Ms X that Ms Y would be added to the management transfer list in April 2024. That raised Ms Y’s hopes until July, when it confirmed she was not eligible.
35. Ms Y is clear she feels she needs to live in a certain area and that she cannot live in a block of flats. While the Council does not agree this is necessary, it has respected Ms Y’s choice during the period I have investigated. However, that choice restricted the number of properties that were available to Ms Y.
36. The properties available to Ms Y were further restricted because the Council had decided she needed a medical category three property, which are rarer than category four properties. When Ms X told the Council Ms Y could use stairs in July 2024, it should have reviewed its decision that Ms Y needed a mobility category three property. Its failure to do so was fault. Given the Council agreed Ms Y should have a category four property in its response to the Ombudsman enquiries, it is likely it would have come to that same decision in July 2024. However, had it done so, the Council’s records show it would not have resulted in Ms Y being able to successfully bid on a property, so the fault only caused her frustration.
37. Ms X is unhappy Ms Y could not bid on some properties which she felt would meet her needs. However, the Council’s allocation scheme allows it to restrict bidding to certain priority groups. That was the Council’s decision to make; it was not at fault.
38. Ms X also wants the Council to make Ms Y a direct offer of accommodation. The Council has the right to choose when a direct offer is appropriate. It has confirmed it will not make an offer in Ms Y’s case. I have seen no evidence of fault in how the Council came to its decision. Its policy sets out when it may make direct offers and Ms Y’s circumstances are not included in that list of circumstances.

Temporary accommodation

39. The Council has a duty to house homeless applicants owed the main housing duty in suitable temporary accommodation. The Council accepts it was at fault for housing Ms Y in unsuitable accommodation throughout the period I have investigated; April 2024 and February 2025. I agree with the Council’s conclusion. The Council has offered Ms Y £1650, which is a suitable remedy for the injustice she experienced by staying in the unsuitable accommodation.

Back to top

Action

40. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council will take the following actions:
• Apologise to Ms Y for the frustration she felt because it wrongly said it had added her to its management transfer list in April 2024. 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.
• Pay Ms Y the £1650 it offered in its complaint response, if it has not already done so.
41. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman