Summary: The Council was at fault for the way it decided the review into Ms X’s housing register application and for the time taken to provide her with a decision. As a result, Ms X cannot be sure the Council made the correct decision and spent time and trouble pursuing the review with the Council. The Council agreed to make a payment to Ms X for the distress caused and to carry out a fresh review of Ms X’s housing application.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council’s decision not to include her on its housing register. She also complains about the time taken to complete the review.

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. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. As part of this investigation, I considered the information provided by Ms X and the Council. I discussed the complaint over the telephone with Ms X. I sent a draft of this decision to Ms X and the Council for comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. 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))

The Council’s housing allocations policy

7. The Council will not allow applicants to join its housing register where it assesses them as not having any housing need.
8. The Council awards medical priority Band 2 to applicants where it assesses their housing is unsuitable for severe medical reasons or due to their disability, but who are not housebound or whose life is not at risk due to their current housing. However, their housing conditions directly contribute to causing serious ill health and the condition of the property cannot be resolved within a reasonable period of time.
9. Applicants can request a review of a decision on their housing application. The Council will consider the review within 56 days except in circumstances where a longer period is agreed with the applicant.

What happened

10. Ms X lives in shared accommodation. She has her own room but shares other facilities such as kitchen and cooking facilities. Ms X suffers with erythema multiforme, Chronic exertional compartment syndrome, anxiety, and depression.
11. Ms X applied to join the Council’s housing register on medical grounds. She provided the Council with some letters from her GP. The Council provided Ms X with a decision on 21 August 2021 which said she did not qualify to join the housing register. The Council said there was no evidence to suggest her accommodation impacted on her medical conditions.
12. On 7 October 2021, Ms X requested a review of this decision. In her review request Ms X explained she needed a clean and tidy environment and easy access to a kitchen. She said she struggles to move around her property due to her mobility issues and dirt and dust triggers her erythema multiforme symptoms.
13. On 25 March 2022, Ms X sent the Council a further letter in support of her review. Ms X outlined her medical conditions and impact these had on her life, but she also said she struggled with the stairs in her property due to her chronic exertional compartment syndrome. Ms X explained this is made worse as she has to use the stairs in the property each time she wanted to access the kitchen.
14. On 7 September 2022, Ms X made a formal complaint to the Council about the time it was taking to provide her with a review decision. The Council responded on 9 September 2022 and apologise to Ms X that she had not heard back from the team dealing with her housing application. The Council said:
• For Ms X’s application to be successful she would need to show a link between her medical condition and accommodation.
• Ms X could not receive medical priority if her accommodation is not impacting her health.
• Its timescales for completing reviews were 56 days. The Council said due to unprecedented volumes of review requests it is exceeding these timescales and apologised for the impact of the delay. The Council said it is in the process of recruiting more staff and mobilising a team to deal with the backlogs.
15. On 20 September 2022, the Council provided Ms X with a review decision. The Council decided to uphold its original decision and not allow Ms X to join the housing register. The decision said the evidence Ms X provided does not demonstrate she has a medical housing need.

Analysis

16. Ms X requested a review of the Council’s decision not to allow her to join the housing register in October 2021. The Council did not provide her with a review decision until 20 September 2022. The Council’s allocations policy says it will carry out reviews within 56 days. The Council’s delay here was fault.
17. I recognise the Council has acknowledged the delay in carrying out the review and apologised to Ms X. It explained it has a large backlog of reviews to complete due to unprecedented demand and it is in the process of recruiting more staff and mobilising a team to deal with its backlogs. While this is welcomed it has not addressed the injustice caused to Ms X.
18. As a result of the Council’s delay Ms X had to make a formal complaint to the Council to receive her review decision and spent time and trouble pursing this with the Council. In addition, she had to wait over nine months longer than she should have had to wait for the decision.
19. Ms X also complains about the Council’s decision not to allow her to join the housing register. We cannot decide whether Ms X should be included onto the Council’s housing register, that is a decision for the Council, but we can consider whether there was any fault in the decision making process.
20. The Council’s review decision letter is very brief and just says the evidence Ms X provided does not demonstrate she has a housing medical need. As part of the review Ms X explained to the Council her current accommodation impacts her heath conditions as she finds it difficult to manage the stairs in her property. She also explained her medical conditions are worsened by having shared facilities and the dust and dirt associated with this. The Council has not in its review decision evidenced that it considered these points. This is fault.
21. I would have expected the Council to have at least addressed these points and explained why in light of this it considered her not to have a housing medical need. Ms X therefore cannot be sure the Council has decided her housing application properly.

Back to top

Agreed action

22. Within one month of my final decision, the Council agreed to carry out the following and provide evidence to the Ombudsman it has done so:
• Pay Ms X £200 to recognise the distress and time and trouble for the faults identified.
23. The Council has accepted that it has ongoing delays in processing and reviewing housing applications due to unprecedented demand. As of October 2022, there was a significant increase in the number of outstanding reviews compared to earlier in 2022. The Council has recently provided an updated action plan to show how it proposes to reduce delays in processing all applications and review requests. This shows it is seeking to recruit temporary officers until March 2023 to deal with the backlog. Following this it will set up a dedicated reviews team to complete the backlog of cases.
24. Within two months of my final decision, the Council agreed to carry out the following and provide evidence to the Ombudsman it has done so:
• Carry out a fresh review of Ms X’s housing application.
• Provide the Ombudsman with an updated report to show what impact the measures it has taken to deal with the backlog of reviews have had.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I have completed my investigation and found the Council was at fault for the way it decided the review of Ms X’s housing register application and for the time taken to provide her with a decision. This caused Ms X injustice. The Council has agreed to the above actions to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman