Summary: Mrs X complains about how the Council has dealt with her housing applications. The Council was at fault for its failure to update Mrs X’s housing applications and complete her review requests. The Council was also at fault for the delays in assessing Mrs X’s housing application and dealing with her complaint. As a result, the Council’s failings caused Mrs X significant distress, uncertainty and time and trouble. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains of the Council’s:

• failure in updating her housing application(s)
• failure in carrying out review requests
• delay in assessing her housing application
• delay in dealing with her complaint.

2. Mrs X says the Council’s failings has caused her significant distress and has affected her health. She also says this matter has led to overcrowding and lack of privacy in her household.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’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)
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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. 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)
6. If we are satisfied with a council’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

7. I discussed the complaint with Mrs X and considered the information she provided. I considered the information the Council provided in response to my enquiries.
8. I have exercised discretion to investigate matters from 2019. This is because I needed to consider the whole period to carry out a meaningful investigation.
9. I sent Mrs X and the Council a copy of my draft decision and considered all comments received before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

10. Every local housing authority must publish an allocation 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))

The Council’s Housing Allocation Scheme

11. The Allocation Scheme allows the Council to place applicants into priority Bands following its assessment of their housing need.
12. The Council’s Scheme identifies reasons applicants will not qualify for housing. Reasons for not qualifying include unacceptable behaviour or actions such as:

“The applicant or a member of the household having been evicted from a tenancy due to breach of any tenancy condition”.

"The applicant or a member of the household having left owing rent at a former property”.

13. An applicant can challenge any decision about a housing application by seeking a review with the Council. The Council’s Allocation Scheme says it considers a review request within 56 days of the request. It may agree a longer period with the applicant.
14. The Council can ask applicants to provide evidence of extenuating circumstances in relation to members of the applicant’s household. The applicant will be required to provide evidence and demonstrate such person(s) to be included in the household need to be cared for and are dependent on the applicant, that other satisfactory arrangements cannot be made and/or that the arrangement is ongoing.

Background

15. Mrs X lives with her husband, young son and her mother in a two-bed property.
16. Mrs X also has a daughter who does not live with her but visits Mrs X and the family occasionally.

What happened

17. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
18. In February 2019, Mrs X submitted a housing application on medical grounds. Mrs X also included her daughter in the housing application. This was because Mrs X’s daughter intended to spend more nights with the family when she visited and she planned to permanently reside with Mrs X’s family.
19. The Council assessed Mrs X’s application and it found her eligible to bid for a four-bed property under a Band 3 priority award due to overcrowding. Mrs X disagreed with the Band award. She requested a review and submitted evidence to support her medical condition. She said according to the Council’s award and its Allocation Scheme, she was overcrowded by two bedrooms and therefore should have been placed in Band 2 priority. In April 2019, the Council considered Mrs X review and confirmed it assessed her initial application incorrectly. The Council advised Mrs X it would reassess her application and her review request was therefore closed. It asked Mrs X to provide further information within ten days about her daughter.
20. The Council completed Mrs X application reassessment in April 2019. The Council corrected Mrs X’s eligibility award to a three-bed property and a priority Band 3. This was because the Council did not receive further evidence about Mrs X’s daughter. It also noted the medical report Mrs X provided did not show the medical conditions were made worse directly by her property. Mrs X disagreed with the Council’s reassessment and requested a further review in April 2019. She maintained the Council should have awarded her a Band 2 priority and an eligibility to bid for a four-bed property. Mrs X also alleged the Council failed to consider both her and her son’s medical conditions.
21. In May 2019, the Council informed Mrs X it would consider her review request by 19 June 2019. It confirmed Mrs X remained eligible for a three-bed property in line with its Allocation Scheme. The Council advised Mrs X she needed to provide further evidence about her daughter if Mrs X wanted her to be included as part of the household. The Council clarified there was no issue with Mrs X’s daughter visiting the household but it was not a basis to award Mrs X an extra bedroom and a higher Band.
22. On 21 June 2019, Mrs X made a change of circumstances (CoC) application to include fostering. This was because Mrs X and her husband wanted to start a foster career. In July 2019, the Council informed Mrs X it had closed the review she requested in April 2019 with no further right of review. This was because her new application replaced her review request. The Council asked Mrs X to provide supporting evidence to show she had been accepted to foster children. Mrs X replied to the Council. She said following a meeting with the Council’s fostering services, it advised Mrs X and her husband that before their fostering application could be considered, Mrs X’s household must have a spare room for fostering purposes.
23. In November 2019, Mrs X invited her friend who had become homeless to move in with her and her family in their two-bed property. Mrs X alleged she submitted a CoC application to include her friend after she moved in. The Council confirmed there was no record of Mrs X making a CoC application in November 2019.
24. In early January 2020, Mrs X included her friend on a new application. She made further applications in February and June 2020. There is no record the Council assessed these three applications. By mid-June 2020, Mrs X made a formal complaint to the Council about how it had dealt with her housing applications and review requests. By end of June 2020, the Council informed Mrs X it would investigate her complaint.
25. On 2 July 2020, the Council issued its Stage 2 response to Mrs X’s complaint. The Council explained it closed the review request Mrs X made in April 2019 because she made a new application in June 2019. The Council confirmed it was considering her housing application. The Council further advised Mrs X to provide supporting evidence about her daughter, her foster career and medical evidence if her accommodation was affecting her health. The Council restated Mrs X remained eligible to bid for a 3-bed property under a Band 3 priority.
26. In response, Mrs X told the Council it had not updated her housing application to include her friend, it held incorrect information about the foster care and that the Council did not request medical reports from her doctor. Mrs X escalated her complaint and she put in a further review request to be moved to a Band 2 priority.
27. Mrs X contacted the Council several times in July and August 2020 requesting an update on her complaint. When Mrs X did not get a response from the Council, she complained to the Ombudsman.
28. In early October 2020, the Council assessed the housing application Mrs X submitted in June 2019. The Council decided Mrs X did not qualify to join the housing register due to a tenancy breach within her household. The Council found Mrs X’s friend was evicted from her property due to rent arrears. So, the Council considered Mrs X’s household conduct fell below the level expected of a suitable tenant and it closed her application.
29. Mrs X disagreed with the Council’s decision to close her application. Mrs X explained she will be responsible for the rent payments and she had no records of rent arrears. She questioned why the Council would penalise her for her friend’s tenancy debts. On 2 October 2020, Mrs X requested a review and submitted a new application based on an exceptional need to move.
30. The Council closed Mrs X’s review request following the new application she submitted the same day. The Council assessed Mrs X’s new application and requested Mrs X to provide evidence for extenuating circumstances in relation to Mrs X’s friend and Mrs X’s mother living in her household. The Council advised Mrs X to provide the evidence within a timescale, otherwise it would close Mrs X’s application.
31. The Council issued its final response to Mrs X’s complaint in mid-October 2020. It apologised to Mrs X for its delay in responding to her complaint. The Council said it would assess Mrs X’s latest housing application by end of October 2020 once she provided the additional information it requested.
32. By the end of October 2020, the Council assessed Mrs X’s housing application. The Council said it did not receive further supporting evidence from Mrs X. In November 2020, the Council informed Mrs X her application was closed. It further explained that Mrs X could re-apply on the Council’s website if she wished but she would need to submit the outstanding evidence the Council requested in relation to her application.
33. Mrs X questioned why the Council required additional evidence about her mother who had lived with her and been on her application when Mrs X was accepted on the housing register.
34. In December 2020, Mrs X’s friend moved out of the household.
35. By mid-December 2020, Mrs X attempted to make a COC application following her friend moving out of Mrs X’s property. Mrs X said the Council had blocked her account and she was unable to submit her application. Mrs X informed the Council her friend had moved out of her property and asked it to reinstate her previous application. It told Mrs X there was no further action to be taken until it receives the Ombudsman investigation outcome.
36. The Council confirmed it had no record of Mrs X making a CoC application in December 2020. It further explained the correspondence between it and Mrs X in mid-December 2020 where Mrs X informed the Council her friend had moved out of her household did not amount to Mrs X making a CoC application.

Analysis

37. I consider there were failings in the way the Council dealt with Mrs X’s housing applications.

Failure to update Mrs X’s housing application(s)

38. In relation to Mrs X’s November 2019 and December 2020 applications, there is no evidence Mrs X made these applications at the specified times. The Council also confirmed it holds no record of the applications Mrs X submitted in November 2019 and December 2020. I cannot therefore say there was fault by the Council.
39. Mrs X submitted new housing applications in January, February and June 2020. I find no evidence the Council assessed these three housing applications. This was fault by the Council.
40. However, I cannot say what the Council’s decisions would have been if it had updated Mrs X’s housing applications during these periods. This causes uncertainty to Mrs X as she cannot know what the outcome of her applications would have been.

Failure to deal with review requests

41. Mrs X requested a review in February 2019. The Council issued its review outcome in April 2019. I find no fault by the Council because it completed the review within the eight-week timescale according to its Allocation Scheme.
42. Mrs X requested a review at the end of April 2019. According to the Council’s correspondence to Mrs X dated 10 May 2019 and its eight-week review timescale, the deadline for this review outcome was 19 June 2019. There is no evidence to show the Council considered this review.
43. If the Council was unlikely to meet its eight-week review outcome deadline, it could have agreed a longer period with Mrs X in line with its Allocation Scheme. It does not appear an extension agreement was reached. Evidence shows the Council informed Mrs X in July 2019 after the review deadline that the review she requested in April 2019 was replaced by the new CoC application Mrs X made on 21 June 2019. This was fault. The Council missed the deadline to respond to Mrs X’s review request by 19 June 2019. The Council should have made its decision within the eight-week timescale.
44. I also found no evidence the Council considered or responded to the review Mrs X requested in July 2020. This was also fault by the Council.
45. However, I find no fault by the Council when it closed Mrs X’s review request dated 2 October 2020. This was because Mrs X made a new application the same day she requested the review. The new application therefore replaced the review request.
46. Again, I cannot say if the Council’s decisions would have resulted in different outcomes if it had considered the review requests Mrs X submitted in April 2019 and July 2020. This creates yet another uncertainty to Mrs X.

Delay in assessing Mrs X’s housing application

47. According to the Council’s Housing Allocation Scheme, there is no set timescale for assessing applications. We would however expect the Council to determine applications in a timely manner.
48. Evidence shows Mrs X’s housing application dated 21 June 2019 was assessed by the Council in October 2020. It took the Council approximately 16 months to assess the application. The Council has acknowledged there was a delay. It explained the delay was due to limited resources and the high volume of housing applications it deals with. This is fault. The Council’s delay caused Mrs X significant distress, uncertainty and the time and trouble she went to in chasing the Council and complaining.
49. I note Mrs X questioned why the Council required evidence of extenuating circumstances for her mother who had lived with her and had been on her application when Mrs X was originally accepted on the housing register. I do not find fault by the Council here. This is because in October 2020, Mrs X made a new application based on “exceptional need to move” and the Council had a right to ask Mrs X for additional evidence to support her new application. This is in line with its Allocation Scheme. There is no evidence Mrs X provided the Council with the supporting evidence it requested in relation to her mother and her friend. It appears Mrs X’s failure to submit the requested information within the specified timescale contributed to the issues and the Council’s delay in assessing her application.
50. The Council has confirmed it is taking actions to address the issue of delays by the Council in assessing housing applications. These actions include appointment of additional staff, restructure and redesign of the Council’s Housing Options Service, review of its Allocation Scheme and all associated procedural documents.
51. Whilst I welcome the Council’s proposed actions, I note these steps are long-term remedies. I remain concerned this will not resolve the delay in assessments in the short term. Therefore, when the Council receives complaints about delayed assessments whilst the consultation and restructure aimed to resolve the issues is ongoing, the Council should consider offering suitable remedies through its own procedures.

Delay in dealing with Mrs X’s complaint

52. According to the Council’s complaint procedure, it aims to resolve complaints straight away at stage 1. Where this is not possible, the Council would proceed to investigate the complaint and respond within 15 working days at stage 2. And at stage 3, the Council will respond within 20 working days.
53. While the Council responded to Mrs X within the timescales at stages 1 and 2, there was a delay of approximately three months with its stage 3 response. Mrs X escalated her complaint to stage 3 in July 2020 and the Council sent its final response on 13 October 2020. This was fault. Mrs X was put to avoidable time and trouble pursuing outcomes of her complaint.

Back to top

Agreed action

54. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified the Council has agreed within one month of the final decision to:

• apologise in writing to Mrs X for the distress and uncertainty caused by the delays and failure to properly deal with Mrs X’s housing applications.
• pay Mrs X £200 for the delay in assessing her applications to acknowledge the uncertainty and distress caused to Mrs X.
• pay Mrs X £100 in recognition for the time and trouble caused to her by the delay in responding to her stage three complaint.
• by training or other means remind staff of the importance of meeting the Council’s complaint procedure timescales.

Back to top

Final decision

55. I find evidence of fault by the Council causing injustice to Mrs X. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy the injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman