Summary: the Council was not at fault when it bypassed Miss X’s bids for two properties advertised on its choice-based lettings scheme and allocated the few five bedroom properties that became available to other applicants.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Miss X, complained that the Council wrongly bypassed her bids for two properties advertised on the Leeds Homes choice-based lettings (CBL) scheme although she had the highest priority.
2. More generally Miss X believes the Council has not fully appreciated the urgency of her family’s housing needs and done enough to help them move quickly to suitable accommodation. Miss X and two of her sons are disabled. She says the poor housing conditions are having a serious impact on their mental and physical health.

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. 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

5. I have spoken to Miss X about her complaint and considered all the information she sent me. I considered the Council’s response to my enquiries and the evidence it provided. I examined records for Miss X's bids on Leeds Homes, the outcome of those bids and the priority of the successful applicants. I have also considered information the Council sent me about direct lettings of properties.
6. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The background to this complaint

7. We are not investigating the way the Council’s response to events that happened several years ago. But I have included some information to explain the background to Miss X’s complaint.
8. Miss X and her family were made homeless in January 2017 following a fire which destroyed their private rented accommodation.
9. Miss X’s landlord moved her to an alternative five bedroom property a few months later. She has lived there since March 2017 with her three sons, two of whom are young adults. Miss X has multiple physical disabilities which affect her mobility and has mental health issues. Two of her sons are registered disabled and the youngest has a chronic medical condition. Miss X recently told me she has been diagnosed with a rare disease which is aggravated by stress.
10. Miss X says the landlord told her this would be temporary accommodation until her former home was rebuilt following the fire. But Miss X and her family are still living there four years later.
11. Miss X told me the property is in extremely poor condition. She cannot use two bedrooms on the lower floor of the house due to severe damp and mould. The property has central heating but only the radiators in the living room work. Miss X says she has to boil kettles to fill the bath. Miss X says it is very expensive to heat the property. She cannot afford to pay high energy bills because she claims benefits.
12. Miss X told me she sleeps in the living room. Her youngest son, who suffers from asthma, was sleeping on the sofa in the same room. Her other sons have a bedroom each on the first floor. Her eldest son has a brain injury and suffers from epilepsy. He recently went to stay with his grandmother. The only adaptation in the property is a level access shower. There are internal steps down to the bedrooms on the lower floor and eight steps up to the front access. Miss X struggles with the stairs due to her mobility issues and she had a fall in the house recently. She told me the unsuitable housing adversely affects the whole family’s mental health.
13. Miss X joined the Housing Register in November 2019 so she could bid for social housing on the Leeds Homes CBL scheme.
14. In March 2020 Miss X was placed in Band B on the Housing Register. This band is awarded to reflect a medium medical priority. The officer in the Independent Living Team who assessed Miss X’s needs made the following recommendations then about the type of property she needed:
• 3 or 4 bedroom house with additional bedroom downstairs to be used as a bedroom. Downstairs WC an advantage and bilateral handrails to one flight of standard stairs. Or a property with adapted stair lift subject to Occupational Therapist’s assessment of safety risks for sons; or
• 4 or 5 bedroom house adapted for one to be contained at ground floor level with WC and adapted Wet Floor Shower; or
• 4 or 5 bedroom house with through floor lift; and
• Preferably with a bath as well as a Wet Floor Shower facility.
15. The Council later increased Miss X’s priority by awarding Band A. This band is awarded where the applicant’s (or a member of their household’s) medical condition is severely affected or worsened by the property they live in and the property cannot be adapted to meet their needs.
16. In August 2020 the Council awarded Band A+. This is the highest priority band available in the scheme. It backdated this priority to November 2019.
17. The Council’s Lettings Policy says Band A + is awarded to recognise cumulative need where a household has more than one distinct assessed need which falls in Band A. Applicants with Band A+ priority are considered to be in greater need than all the other applicants in Band A.
18. Miss X is eligible for a five bedroom property. This provides a bedroom for each family member and an extra bedroom for an overnight carer. But she may also bid for properties with three or four bedrooms.

Bidding for properties on Leeds Homes and direct lettings

19. Most social housing properties are advertised through the Leeds Homes choice based lettings scheme. Applicants on the Housing Register may express interest in advertised properties by bidding for them. Generally the property is allocated to the top ranked bidder. But the Council may bypass the top ranked bidder in certain circumstances. This will happen when the property does not match their assessed bedroom need and they would under- occupy the property.
20. In some circumstances the Council may allocate a property to an applicant outside the choice-based lettings scheme. This is called a direct letting.
21. Along with other groups, direct lettings are made to applicants who have an assessed need for a specific type of property which is adapted, or could be adapted, to meet their needs.
22. The Council’s lettings policy says where possible a direct letting offer will take into account the applicant’s preferences, for example, on property type and area. But in some circumstances this will not be possible, for example in areas where demand for social housing is high and properties are in short supply.
23. Miss X can bid for any properties advertised on Leeds Homes. But, for the purpose of direct lettings, she had to choose one housing management area in the city.

Bypassing Miss X’s bids for two properties

24. In October 2020 Miss X complained to the Council that she had been wrongly bypassed for two properties for which she had bid on Leeds Homes.
25. One was a Council property she bid for in September 2020. I refer to this as Property A.
26. Miss X bid for this property because she understood when she read the advert that it had five bedrooms. The advert said:

“Property has 5 bedrooms and a standard bathroom upstairs plus an additional ground floor bedroom with full wet room. Back garden is secure and accessible. There is a drive at the front of the property. Preference given to applicants requiring the adaptations”.

27. Miss X’s bid was ranked in first position. But the Council bypassed her because her maximum bedroom entitlement was five bedrooms and this property had six bedrooms so she was not eligible.
28. When it replied to Miss X’s complaint, the Council accepted that the advert could have been worded differently to make it clearer that it was a six bedroom property. But the advert did mention the sixth bedroom. And the Council found the decision to bypass Miss X was correct because the property was larger than her assessed bedroom need.
29. The second property was a Housing Association property. I refer to this as Property B. Miss X bid for this property in late July 2020 (before she was awarded Band A+). Her bid was ranked 11th. The Council’s records show this property was allocated to someone who had Band A+ priority since January 2019. So Miss X was not bypassed for this property because her bid was not ranked 1st. And even if the Council had awarded Band A+ sooner, the applicant who was allocated this property had greater priority than her.

Direct lettings

30. The Council says it has not made any direct lettings of five bedroom properties in Miss X’s preferred areas in the past 12 months because no suitable properties have become available.

Allocations of five bedroom properties

31. I have examined the Council’s records of the five bedroom properties it has allocated since April 2020.
32. There are only four properties on this list. One is Property A. It appears twice on the list although it was a six bedroom property. I have explained in paragraph 28 explains why the Council did not allocate this property to Miss X.
33. Miss X did not bid for one of the other properties on this list and it was not in her preferred area for a direct letting. According to the Council’s records, Miss X did place a bid for the other property but later withdrew it so it was not considered.
34. Miss X is still bidding for properties on Leeds Homes. A Housing Occupational Therapist will visit any properties for which she is ranked first to assess whether they have the necessary adaptations, or can be adapted to meet her family’s needs. Miss X is still waiting to hear the outcome of some recent bids. However we cannot investigate the outcome of bids she made after she complained to us in December 2020.

Analysis

35. Miss X and her family have complex multiple needs. Their current accommodation is clearly unsuitable for them. I understand Miss X is desperate to move to suitable accommodation and she is frustrated that it is taking so long to get an offer. The shortage of five bedroom properties which are suitable, or can be adapted, to meet her family’s specific needs is clearly an important factor. We must decide whether the delay in rehousing Miss X is due to fault by the Council and whether it wrongly bypassed her for some properties.
36. The Council has recognised that Miss X and her family have an urgent housing need because it awarded the highest priority band – Band A+ - available in its lettings policy. It also backdated this priority. So I do not uphold Miss X’s complaint that the Council failed to appreciate the urgency of her housing needs.
37. I considered the reasons why the Council bypassed Miss X for Property A and did not offer her Property B. On the evidence I have seen, I am satisfied Property A was too large for Miss X’s assessed bedroom need so it was not fault to bypass her bid. Property B was correctly allocated to an applicant who had Band A+ priority from January 2019.
38. I also looked at the outcome of bids Miss X made up until she complained to us in December 2020. Many of these properties were allocated to applicants who had Band A+ priority for longer than Miss X. Miss X withdrew her bid for one property. She was correctly bypassed for Property A. For these reasons, I see no evidence of fault.
39. The lack of any five bedroom properties in Miss X’s chosen areas has prevented the Council from making a direct letting in the past 12 months.
40. Miss X and her family are still living in very unsatisfactory housing conditions. But I do not consider this situation has come about due to any fault by the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

41. I have completed the investigation and found no fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman