Summary: Mrs Y complained about the Council’s response to her request for a re-assessment of her housing band award following a change in circumstances. The Ombudsman has found fault by the Council in the way it dealt with the request, causing injustice. The Council has agreed to remedy this by making an apology, a payment to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused by this fault and a service improvement.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I am calling Mrs Y, complained about the way the Council dealt with her request for a re-assessment of her housing band award following a change in circumstances. Mrs Y’s solicitor, who I am calling Mr X, brought the complaint to us on her behalf.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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

4. I made enquiries of the Council and read the information Mr X and the Council have provided about the complaint.
5. I invited Mrs Y, Mr X and the Council to comment on a draft version of this decision. I considered their responses before making my final decision.

What I found

The Council’s Housing Allocations Scheme

6. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme setting out the way it determines priorities, and its procedures, for allocating social housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
7. The Council’s allocation scheme says:

• It is required by law to determine the relative priority awarded to housing applicants. These priorities – the statutory reasonable preference categories – are set out in section 166A of the Housing Act 1996.
• One of these categories is people occupying unsanitary or overcrowded housing. Another is people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds (including grounds relating to disability).
• Applicants must notify it immediately of any change in their circumstances by completing an online form.
• A relevant Council officer will assess circumstances relating to unsuitability of an applicant’s housing for severe medical reasons or disability. A referral may be made to a relevant Council advisor, depending on the circumstances.
• Applicants cannot bid or be considered for an allocation whilst their application is re-assessed.

8. The law and guidance do not set out a timescale for processing applications. Nor does the Council’s allocations policy. But we expect councils to deal with applications in a timely manner. Four to six weeks is what we consider an appropriate time to process applications.

What happened

Background

9. In 2017 Mrs Y and her husband, Mr Y, were accepted on to the Council’s housing register. They were assessed as Band 3, due to overcrowding, and eligible to bid for a three- bedroom property. They have four children – two boys and two girls, aged between eight and 14 – and are currently living in a two-bedroom privately rented property.
10. In May 2019 a support worker submitted a change of circumstances form to the Council on Mr and Mrs Y’s behalf. This stated two of their children had physical conditions affecting their dexterity and mobility. Inability to feel pain caused their daughter’s broken ankle and their son’s many broken bones, which left them unable to access facilities in the home such as the toilet. Their condition would be improved by moving to another property.
11. The Council wrote to Mr and Mrs Y in January 2020. It said it had assessed the information provided about their change in circumstances and confirmed their priority remained the same - Band 3, due to overcrowding. The letter also stated:

“Before you can be assessed for a Mobility award you will need to be assessed by an Occupational Therapist from the Independent Living Service. An assessment can be requested by telephone on: …..You will need to give them your housing application reference number as without this they will be unable to assist you, once you have had the assessment we will be advised of any recommendations in regards to your future housing.”

12. Mr X wrote to the Council’s housing department on Mrs Y’s behalf in September 2020. He said:

• her circumstances may have changed and asked the Council to consider re-assessing her banding award.
• In addition to the overcrowding, the band should be altered specifically on the grounds of medical needs and/or exceptional needs,
• Because of their son’s medical condition and mobility issues, and as there was only one bathroom at the property, his parents often have to carry him up and down the stairs when he needs to use this facility.
• A letter from a GP was enclosed. This provided information about the impact of their son’s medical condition and reference to his sister’s condition.

13. In reply, the Council told Mr and Mrs Y their solicitor’s request for a review of their housing application was out of time – as it had not been made within 21 days of a decision on their application.
14. Mr X brought Mrs Y’s complaint to us in November 2020.

Current position

15. Following our contact with it about Mrs Y’s complaint, the Council arranged an assessment for Mrs Y’s son by its Occupational Therapy (OT) service. After considering the outcome of this assessment the Council decided to change Mrs Y’s banding award from Band 3 to Band 2 on 6 May 2021.

Analysis – was there fault by the Council causing injustice?

Delay in processing Mrs Y’s change of circumstances

16. It took the Council nine months to process Mrs Y’s notification of her change in circumstances. I appreciate the Council handles a high volume of applications, but, in my view, it did not process Mrs Y’s new information within a reasonable time frame, which I consider should be within four to six weeks. This is fault which caused a delay in Mrs Y being given the opportunity to have an assessment by the OT service of her son’s mobility.

Information provided in January 2020 letter

17. The Council made no specific reference to the information provided about their son and daughter’s medical conditions when it notified Mr and Mrs Y of its decision in January 2020. The decision letter said their award remained Band 3. In my view, it did not properly explain they would have to arrange an assessment by the OT service before the Council would determine the effect of their son’s condition on their housing application banding.
18. The Council accepted, in its response to our enquiries, there may have been barriers to Mrs Y accessing the OT service. This is fault which caused Mrs Y to miss out on the opportunity to ask for an assessment of her son’s mobility and the effect of this on their housing priority.

Response to Mr X’s contact in September 2020

19. When it received Mr X’s letter in September 2020, I consider it should have been clear to the Council’s housing department, he was telling it about the change in Mrs Y’s circumstances due to her son’s condition. The GP’s letter provided clear information about how this was affecting her son and the family.
20. The Council accepted, in its response to our enquires, it did not properly consider the medical information sent with the letter in September 2020. My view is this was fault by the Council. The Council’s allocations policy says notification of change of circumstances should be made online, and Mrs Y did this in May 2019. It was the Council’s failure to respond properly to this notification which led to Mr X’s letter in September 2020. Had the Council checked the background it could have explained what needed to happen next. But it did not do so and in my view, this caused another missed opportunity for an assessment of Mrs Y’s son’s mobility and the effect on the family’s housing need.

Impact of the Council’s faults

21. In my view, the faults identified above significantly delayed the Council’s award of Band B to Mrs Y. The law and guidance do not set out a timescale for processing applications. Nor does the Council’s allocations policy. But we expect councils to deal with applications in a timely manner. Four to six weeks is what we consider an appropriate time to process applications. In my view, had the Council dealt with this in a timely way, her change of circumstances should have been processed by about 1 July 2019 (four to six weeks of 19 May 2019).
22. Had the Council then clearly explained to Mrs Y in July 2019 an OT assessment was required before it could make a decision on changing her band award, I consider this could have been completed within about six weeks (the timescale for the assessment and decision earlier this year). On that basis my view is the Council’s decision to award Mrs Y Band B should have been made by about 16 August 2019.
23. The Council has provided details of offers of three bedroom properties in Mrs Y’s preferred areas made to Band 2 applicants from August 2019. This shows only one offer has been made since then of a three bedroom property (a flat) to an applicant with an award date later than 16 August 2019. The Council also provided details of Mrs Y’s bidding history which confirms she did not make a bid for this property.
24. My view is the Council’s faults did not cause Mrs Y to miss out on an offer of a suitable property through the bidding process. But I consider the delay of some 19 months in the assessment of her change of circumstances caused Mrs Y uncertainty and distress, and time and trouble contacting the Council again in September 2020. This is injustice.

Back to top

Agreed action

25. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults, and within four weeks from the date of our final decision, the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Mrs Y for the delay in assessing her change of circumstances, failing to properly explain the process or consider the medical information in January and September 2020.
• Backdate her Band B award to 16 August 2019
• Pay Mrs Y £350 to reflect the avoidable distress and inconvenience these faults caused her.
• This figure is a symbolic amount based on the Ombudsman’s published Guidance on Remedies.

26. And, within three months of the date of our final decision, provide us with evidence it has reviewed:

• Its response to information from applicants about their, or household members, health or disability issues, to ensure its process for assessing medical housing need is clearly explained.
• its process for the completion of assessments required for the assessment of medical housing need, to ensure any barriers for applicants in arranging these are removed.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I have found fault by the Council causing injustice. I have completed my investigation on the basis the Council will take the above action as a suitable way to remedy the injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman