Summary: Mr D complains the Council delayed accepting his housing register application by six months. The Council has already acknowledged some fault and remedied this. The Ombudsman has upheld the complaint, because of the fault by the Council, and completed the investigation because there is no outstanding injustice to Mr D.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Mr D) says the Council mishandled his housing register application in 2021 which resulted in a six-month delay where he lost a chance to successfully bid for a new home.
2. In addition, Mr D refers to issues with social housing providers, rent charges and right to buy matters.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have considered the Council’s handling of the housing application.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

4. The rest of Mr D’s complaint is not for the Ombudsman as it concerns a Housing Association and housing management. I have explained to Mr D that he can pursue a complaint with the Housing Ombudsman.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as Housing Associations, that would be for the Housing Ombudsman to consider. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34(1), as amended)
6. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word 'fault' to refer to these. 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 have carefully considered the information provided by Mr D. In addition, I asked the Council questions and examined its evidence.
8. I shared my draft decision with both parties and considered their responses.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

9. In this case a Housing Association works on behalf of the Council managing the housing register. As an agent of the Council, they are referred to as ‘the Council’ for the purposes of this statement
10. In April 2021 Mr D applied to the Council for housing with his child and wife (Mrs D) as household members (his wife was a foreign national). On 5 May the Council updated the application file record and noted Mrs D was a “joint applicant” for housing. The Council then asked Mr D for documentation including information on Mr D and his child’s residency in the UK. It also asked about Mrs D’s residency status because she had been included on the application. On 6 May Mr D told the Council his wife was not part of the application as she was on a visiting visa, the housing application was just for him and his child.
11. At the end of May the Council suspended the application because Mrs D was ineligible to be a joint applicant and it had not received other evidence required.
12. In June Mr D submitted a stage 1 review request. The Council replied in August that Mrs D did not have a right to rent property in the UK as a household member. In addition, Mr D had not supplied the evidence requested including information about his residence status or that of his child’s. Mr D pursued a stage 2 review with assistance from Citizens Advice in September. The case was considered by the Review Panel that month. It agreed that Mrs D was not a joint applicant and, because Mr D had now submitted outstanding evidence, he could be accepted as eligible to join the housing register with his child. The application went ‘live’ on 15 October allowing Mr D to bid for a home.
13. In 2022 Mr D pursued a complaint with the Council, mainly about issues that we are not investigating. He claimed he lost six months where he could have successfully found a new home due to failures by the council.
14. In July I started my investigation. In August the Council decided to update Mr D’s priority band start date to April 2021 (when he first applied) rather than October when his review was accepted. It said this was because of uncertainty about who had added Mrs D as a joint applicant.

What should have happened

15. When the Council receives a housing register application it must assess it in line with its housing allocations policy. It needs to assess whether the applicant is eligible to apply for housing. The Council requires evidence about an applicant and their household to verify eligibility. If that evidence is not provided the Council will suspend and deny the application.
16. Where an application is refused the applicant can contest the decision at a stage one review. If they remain dissatisfied, they can request a stage two review. This is carried out by a Review Panel who have 56 days to reach a decision.
17. When a person is accepted onto the housing register, they are awarded a band and a start date. These are considered when they bid for a property because the Council generally awards homes to the person with the highest band and longest start date.

Was there fault by the Council

18. The evidence shows me there was fault by the Council. It incorrectly noted Mrs D as a joint applicant on its records in May 2021, this led to confusion and misinformed part of the decision making process which was only rectified by the Review Panel. However, there was also fault by Mr D: he failed to provide evidence about himself and his child which was needed by the Council to reach a view. Once the Council had that information, which was submitted for the Review Panel, it was able to reach an informed view on the application.

Did the fault cause an injustice

19. Mr D says the Council should have accepted his application six months earlier and lost an opportunity to bid for a property. I do not see any outstanding injustice to Mr D for the following reasons:
• I checked the properties allocated in the six-month period (April to October 2021). In the areas selected by Mr D only two suitable homes were advertised, they went to applicants with a higher housing priority than him. He did not lose an opportunity to be rehoused;
• The Council has changed the start date for Mr D’s application to April 2021 which puts him back in a position he would have been had the faut not occurred.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I have upheld the complaint (because of the partial fault by the Council) and completed the investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman