Summary: The Council’s failure to consider relevant information in deciding Ms X did not qualify to join the housing register was fault. The Council was also at fault for failing to complete a medical needs assessment in line with its allocations policy. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Ms X £300, reassess Ms X’s application, and take action to improve its service.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed properly to consider her personal circumstances and the evidence she provided before deciding she does not qualify to join the Council’s housing register.
2. Ms X says she and her two children who have Special Education Needs (SEN) are living in unaffordable accommodation away from their support network.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. We cannot question whether an organisation’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (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(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I spoke to Ms X and considered the information she provided.
7. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant guidance and the Council’s housing allocations scheme.
8. I referred to the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
9. Ms X and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Housing allocations

10. 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))
11. Councils must notify applicants in writing of the following decisions and give reasons:
• that the applicant is not eligible for an allocation;
• that the applicant is not a qualifying person;
• a decision not to award the applicant reasonable preference because of their unacceptable behaviour.
12. The Council must also notify the applicant of the right to request a review of these decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))

The Council’s scheme

13. So far as is relevant to this complaint, the Council’s scheme says certain people will not qualify to join the housing register including:
• Households with no demonstrable housing need
• Households with sufficient financial resources
14. The Council’s scheme says that applicants who apply because their accommodation affects a medical condition or disability “will be referred to the council’s medical adviser or occupational therapy team depending on the information you have provided in your application.”
15. The Council says it will complete reviews within 56 days. It says that if it needs more time, it will tell the applicant as soon as possible.

Background

16. Ms X is divorced. Her ex-husband domestically abused her.
17. As a result of the divorce, Ms X had to sell the marital home. She and her children went to live with her mother for several months. Ms X then moved into private rented accommodation.
18. From the sale of the marital home, Ms X received money. Ms X says she had to spend most of this repaying debts and securing and furnishing her current private rented property.
19. Ms X says because the rent on the property is unaffordable, she is using the remaining money to pay her and the children’s day to day living expenses.

What happened

20. Ms X applied to the housing register four times.
21. Her first two applications, in September and December 2020, were closed automatically because Ms X did not upload the necessary documents.
22. Ms X says this is because in her application, she requested a telephone call to discuss her situation.
23. Ms X made a third application to the register in May 2021.
24. In June, the Council wrote to Ms X to say she did not qualify to join the housing register. This was because her savings were above the maximum threshold in the scheme. The letter warned that “deliberate disposal of assets or savings in order to become eligible for an allocation will render the applicant ineligible.”
25. Ms X asked the Council to review the decision. She sent the Council supporting information, including bank statements and a breakdown of how she had spent her money. She sent further evidence in subsequent emails.
26. In September, the Council completed its review. It decided that Ms X did not qualify to join the housing register for the reasons it gave in June. It said she had not provided evidence of how she had spent her money. It “would expect to see bank records detailing transactions.”
27. In October, Ms X applied to the register for a fourth time. Her savings were now below the threshold.
28. In February 2022, the Council wrote to Ms X to say she did not qualify to join the housing register. This was because it decided she was not in any housing need.
29. Ms X asked the Council to review this decision.

My findings

30. The Council’s system automatically deleted Ms X’s first two applications because she didn’t provide the necessary documents. The Council’s scheme says it will not assess an application until all relevant documents are provided. Therefore, it was not fault for the Council to close Ms X’s first two applications.
31. In deciding that Ms X did not qualify to join the housing register on her third application, the Council said that Ms X’s savings were too high and that she had not adequately explained how she had spent her money.
32. Ms X provided the Council with detailed evidence, including bank statements, of all her financial transactions from February to October 2021.
33. Despite this, the Council said Ms X had not provided evidence of her spending. From this, I conclude that the Council failed to consider the evidence Ms X provided. This is fault.
34. In refusing her fourth application to the housing register, the Council said Ms X was not in any housing need.
35. The Council’s scheme says that when an application is for a move on health grounds, the Council will ask its medical adviser or an OT (occupational therapist) to do a needs assessment. Both Ms X and her children have medical conditions and disabilities. Ms X provided detailed information about this in her application and review requests. She said their current housing affected their health, particularly hers and that of her eldest child.
36. The Council did not complete any health assessment before deciding Ms X did not qualify. This is not in line with the Council’s allocations scheme and is fault.
37. The Council said Ms X was not in housing need because her current private rented accommodation meets her and the children’s needs. There is no evidence the Council considered whether the property is affordable in reaching this decision. This is fault.
38. There is uncertainty about whether the Council would have reached the same decision were it not for the faults I have identified. This is an injustice to Ms X.
39. The Council says it will complete reviews within 56 days. Ms X asked for her first review in late June 2021. The Council should have responded by late August. It did not complete the review until late September. This is a delay of a month and is fault. Throughout this time. Ms X asked the Council for updates. It frequently told her it would respond by a particular date, which it then failed to do. This is fault.
40. As a result, Ms X went to significant time and trouble pursuing her applications and review request. This is an injustice to Ms X.

Back to top

Agreed action

41. To remedy the injustice to Ms X from the fault I have identified the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Ms X in writing
• Pay Ms X £300 in recognition of her avoidable uncertainty and time and trouble.
• Reconsider Ms X’s application to the housing register, after a health needs assessment and taking into account the affordability of the property.
42. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
43. The Council should also take the following action to improve its services:
• Remind relevant staff that any delay completing a review should be communicated to the applicant in advance of the deadline and a new timeframe given.
44. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken within eight weeks of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

45. I have completed my investigation. There is fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman