Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s failure to acknowledge her status as a former looked after child and honour previous commitment about future support. This affected her priority on the Council’s housing register. We did not find the Council was at fault.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s failure to recognise her looked after child status when she applied for social housing.
2. She says her family was told support with housing would be provided when she became an adult.
3. Miss X is represented by her grandmother, Mrs Y, in making this complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
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 Mr and Mrs Y and considered the information they provided.
7. I considered information provided by the Council in response to my enquiries.
8. I considered the relevant law, guidance and Council policy.
9. Miss X and the Council 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

Relevant law and guidance

Looked after children and private arrangements

10. Section 20 of the Children Act 1989 says councils shall provide accommodation to any child in need within their area who needs it, because:

• there is nobody with parental responsibility to care for them;
• they have been lost or abandoned; or
• the person who has been caring for them being prevented from providing suitable accommodation or care.

11. Councils need to distinguish between private arrangements made between parents and carers, and arrangements in which the child is accommodated under the Children Act 1989 and so is a looked after child. Private fostering or caring arrangements are sometimes called informal kinship care arrangements.

The Council’s housing allocations scheme

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. Under the Council’s allocations scheme, additional priority will be awarded to applications who are “ready to move on from a care environment or a supported accommodation”.

What happened.

14. In 2006, Miss X’s grandparents, Mr and Mrs Y, successfully applied for a residence order. This was because Miss X’s mother was unable to provide appropriate care. The Council supported Mr and Mrs Y with the costs associated with this court action. It also paid Mr and Mrs X an allowance. Mrs Y says she was led to believe that Miss X would be helped to find accommodation when she wanted to leave home.
15. When she was 21, Miss X applied to join the Council’s housing register. She was told she had not been awarded additional priority because she was not a former looked after child.
16. Mrs Y was unhappy with this decision because of what she says she was promised when she agreed to take care of their granddaughter in 2006. She made enquiries and was disappointed to find out Miss X’s case had been closed by the Council when she was 16. Mrs Y had not been informed.
17. Mrs Y also contacted the Council’s adult social care team asking for help. A social worker (Mr P) wrote a letter of support to the housing team confirming Miss X was a former looked after child. This did not alter Miss X’s priority on the housing register.
18. Mrs Y complained to the Council on Miss X’s behalf. Her complaint was not upheld because Miss X was not deemed to be a former looker after child. As such she was not entitled to additional priority under the Council’s allocations policy.
19. Disappointed by this outcome, Miss X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

20. The Council’s allocations policy states additional priority will only be awarded to those who are ready to move on from a care environment or supported accommodation. The Council has explained this does not apply to Miss X because she lives with her grandparents under a private, voluntary arrangement. I agree this is the correct interpretation and I have seen no evidence that Miss X was ever accommodated by the Council outside of this voluntary arrangement.
21. The fact the Council provided financial support during Miss X’s childhood, does not affect this.
22. I do not doubt Mrs Y’s recollection of what she was told about future housing support. But in the absence of any written record of such a commitment, I cannot say the Council is obliged to honour this.
23. In response to my enquiries, the Council has confirmed Officer P made a mistake when he referred to Miss X as a looked after child. This was because he is not a children’s specialist and took on face value what he had been told by Mrs Y over the phone. Whilst this was unfortunate, I do not consider this error amounts to fault, particularly as it has no bearing on the outcome.
24. In summary, I am satisfied the Council considered Miss X’s housing application in accordance with its allocations policy. There was no fault.

Back to top

Final decision

25. I have not found the Council to be at fault and have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman