Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his homelessness and housing register applications. In particular, its failure to properly understand his disability needs, its poor communication and its failure to make reasonable adjustments so he could access its services. Mr X also complains he could not bid for several months. Mr X said that, but for the Councils failings he would have been able to successfully bid for suitable adaptable property. We have found fault in the Councils handling of Mr X’s housing register and homelessness applications and communications about the applications. The Council has agreed to issue a further apology and pay Mr X a financial payment.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his homelessness and housing register applications. In particular, its failure to properly understand his disability needs, its poor communication and its failure to make reasonable adjustments so he could access its services. Mr X also complains he could not bid for several months.
2. Mr X said that, but for the Councils failings he would have been able to successfully bid for suitable adaptable property.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), 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. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mr X and the Council were invited to comment on my draft decision. Any comments received have been considered before a final decision was made.

Back to top

What I found

7. 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))
8. An allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants in the following categories:

• homeless people;
• people in insanitary, overcrowded or unsatisfactory housing;
• people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds;
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others; (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(3))

9. Councils must notify applicants in writing of the following decisions and give reasons:

• that the applicant is not eligible for an allocation;
• that the applicant is not a qualifying person;
• a decision not to award the applicant reasonable preference because of their unacceptable behaviour.

10. The Council must also notify the applicant of the right to request a review of these decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))

The Council’s housing allocation scheme

11. The Council’s allocations policy says applicants must complete a Housing Register Form and supply additional information to support their application. Applicants are encouraged to apply to join the housing register via its website but a paper form is also available.
12. The policy says applicants who may need help in completing their application can request assistance from any partner landlord.
13. The Council’s allocations policy says adapted homes will be advertised as part of the scheme to ensure that applicants needing this type of accommodation are given the widest possible choice. It says priority will be given on the shortlist to applicants who require, or best match, the specific adaptions within the property.

Homelessness

14. If someone contacts a council seeking accommodation or help to obtain accommodation and gives ‘reason to believe’ they ‘may be’ homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, the council has a duty to make inquiries into what, if any, duty it owes them. The threshold for triggering the duty to make inquiries is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular department of the council. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)
15. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
16. After completing inquiries, the council must give the applicant a decision in writing. If it is an adverse decision, the letter must fully explain the reasons. (Housing Act 1996, Section 184, Homelessness Code of Guidance 18.32 and 18.33)
17. While a Council is carrying out inquiries in an applicant’s case, it must also secure accommodation for the applicant and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. This is called interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, Section 188)
18. Councils must take reasonable steps to help secure accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This is called the relief duty.
19. The Homelessness Code of Guidance says that where the council is satisfied that the applicant has a priority need and has become homeless unintentionally, the relief duty comes to an end after 56 days.
20. If the applicant’s homelessness has not been successfully relieved by then, the Council will owe them the main housing duty. The Council must ensure suitable accommodation is available for the applicant and their household until that duty is completed. (Housing Act 1996, Section 192(2)).

What happened

21. Mr X sent a housing register application to the Council in late March 2024 and discussed the application with the Council in early April 2024. The Council asked Mr X for further information such as supporting evidence from a hospital consultant.
22. The Council wrote to Mr X in early April 2024 to say his housing register application was live and he was eligible for a one bed property and was in Band one. The Council asked Mr X to provide a health and wellbeing form to assess how his property was affecting his health. It also asked Mr X to provide letters from his GP. The Council told Mr X once it had received that information, and an Occupational Therapist report it would look to see if his banding could increase.
23. The Council wrote to the landlord of Mr X’s property in early April about the condition of the property he was living in.
24. Mr X and the Council discussed his housing needs in mid-April 2024 and Mr X explained what property he would require to meet his needs.
25. The Council increased Mr X’s priority banding to gold in late April 2024 and said he would need a two-bed property.
26. Mr X says the Council told him on several occasions between late April and mid-May 2024 that it could not include his sons’ who were away at University in his housing application. The Council has not been able to find a record of this.
27. A social prescriber made a referral to the Council about Mr X’s housing situation in May 2024. Mr X also told the Council he had physical and cognitive issues and required clear responses to questions he asked.
28. The Council emailed the NHS at the end of May 2024 and said Mr X was known to it. But, it did not have an active case and Mr X was not recorded as homeless or under any threat of homelessness.
29. Mr X raised a complaint with the Council in late May 2024. He said the Council was not communicating with him in a manner which considered his vulnerability. He said the Council told him his sons could no longer live with him, and he remained in a property on multiple levels with significant mould and damp.
30. The Council contacted Mr X in early June 2024 to discuss his housing options. Mr X was unhappy with the call and raised a further complaint about the officer advising they had no knowledge of Mr X and ending the call when he discussed reasonable adjustments.
31. The Council contacted Mr X the following day and apologised for the call the previous day. It offered Mr X a single point of contact to discuss his case with.
32. Mr X made a homelessness application in early June 2024 and the Council completed an assessment and created a Personalised Housing Plan in mid- June 2024. The Council also accepted the relief duty in mid-June 2024 and acknowledged Mr X’s property was detrimental to his health.
33. The Council issued a response to Mr X’s complaints in early July 2024 and apologised for what had happened and the distress caused to him. The Council said Mr X’s complaint had highlighted the need for additional training and allocated Mr X a new housing officer and support officer.
34. Mr X was unhappy with the complaint response and escalated his complaint to stage two.
35. A housing provider offered Mr X temporary accommodation in mid-July 2024 which he felt was unsuitable. The Council also agreed this was unsuitable.
36. Mr X contacted the Council in late July 2024 to say he had identified a suitable property but could not bid on it as it was a three-bedroom property. The Council called Mr X in early August 2024 to discuss issues he was experiencing.
37. Mr X raised a further complaint in early August and said the Council had not yet responded to his request to escalate his original complaint. He also said he was blocked from bidding on properties and felt he had missed suitable properties. Mr X also said he was unclear why the Council had recently requested information about his sons who were at University and other information. Mr X said he was worried about being placed in temporary accommodation due to the effect it would have on his mental and physical health.
38. The Council issued a stage two response to Mr X’s complaint in early August 2024. The Council upheld Mr X’s complaints about lack of understanding in the initial interview, poor communications and help with reasonable adjustments. The Council said it felt a case review would be helpful to try and resolve the issues Mr X was experiencing. The Council apologised for the faults noted and recommended various actions such as areas of training, reviewing Mr X’s homelessness case and making a GP referral for support strategies.
39. The Council changed Mr X’s eligibility to a three-bed property in early August 2024 and completed a suitability assessment in mid-August 2024.
40. The Council wrote to Mr X accepting the main housing duty in late August 2024 after the relief duty ended.
41. Mr X contacted the Council in late August 2024 to say he was blocked from bidding on the housing system. The Council responded the same day to say it would contact the company which operated the bidding system.
42. The Council contacted Mr X the following day to say he had been mistakenly blocked from bidding as it was exploring temporary accommodation for him. The Council said it had asked this was rectified.
43. The Council issued a follow up response to its stage two complaint response in early September 2024. The response explained it had identified additional training need. It also said Mr X was mistakenly blocked from bidding when it had asked the housing provider to hold a property for him while it assessed its suitability. It said it asked for the mistake to be corrected quickly. The Council also accepted there was nothing in its housing policy which said Mr X’s sons could not be included as part of his household while they were at university. It also accepted he should not have been told this.
44. The Council went on to say it had now accepted the main housing duty and were required to find Mr X temporary accommodation. The Council acknowledged Mr X’s concerns about this but confirmed it could not make a commitment to keep Mr X in temporary accommodation for any length of time. It said it would have to make an offer of permanent housing when it became available.
45. The Council also said Mr X could bid on new build properties but that some landlords would not allow adaptions to be made to properties within the first twelve months.
46. Mr X moved into temporary accommodation in early October 2024.

Analysis

Housing allocations

47. The Council accepted in its stage two response there were faults in the way it communicated with Mr X and apologised for these. The Council also identified training was needed surrounding this. However, Mr X would have been caused distress and frustration by the way the Council communicated with him which is not addressed by the apology or training put in place by the Council.
48. Mr X says the Council told him on several occasions his sons, who were away at University, could not be included in his household. The Council has accepted this was not part of its policy and it should not have told Mr X this. This is fault and would have caused Mr X a great deal of distress.
49. Mr X says this also led to the Council incorrectly assessing his need and him missing out on bidding on three-bed properties. The Council has said Mr X did not raise the need for a three-bed property until the end of May 2024. It amended its records to allow Mr X to bid on three bed properties in early-August 2024. Mr X has had a loss of opportunity to bid on three bed properties for around three months.
50. I understand the Council has amended its policy which is due to be published shortly to include specific guidance about when parties are away at University.
51. Mr X says he has been stopped from bidding on new build properties as adaptions cannot be made to these properties. I have seen the Council has approached housing providers and has been told by those companies that adaptions would not be allowed. I cannot see the Council has a policy about declining adaptions to new build properties.

Homelessness

52. Mr X contacted the Council for help with his housing situation in April 2024. The Council contacted Mr X’s landlord at this time due to the condition of the property. The Council has said the officer who dealt with Mr X’s contact took the communication as questions about help rather than an application.
53. After Mr X submitted his homelessness application in June 2024 the Council accepted the relief duty. In the letter which the Council sent to Mr X it decided he was eligible for assistance and homeless. The letter says the Council decided this because Mr X’s accommodation was detrimental to his health and was not suitable.
54. The Council had information about the condition of the property Mr X was living in in April 2024 as it wrote to his landlord about it. It was also aware at that point about the challenges Mr X was having in terms of the layout of the property. The Council should have assessed Mr X’s housing needs at the point it was aware of issues with the property. This is fault and has caused Mr X to remain in unsuitable accommodation.

Back to top

Action

55. Within one month of a final decision, the Council should:

• Write to Mr X to further apologise for the faults identified.
• Pay Mr X £500 to recognise the loss of opportunity of bidding on three-bed properties.
• Pay Mr X £2,100 in recognition of him being deprived of suitable accommodation for a six-month period.
• Pay Mr X £250 in recognition of the distress caused to him.

56. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

I find fault causing injustice in the Councils handling of Mr X’s housing register and homelessness applications and communications about the applications.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman