Summary: Mrs B complained that the Council took too long to process her medical assessment and has given her insufficient priority on the housing register. We found the Council delayed in carrying out the medical assessment but has taken appropriate action to remedy the fault. Mrs B has not missed out on any more suitable accommodation during the period of delay.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complained that the London Borough of Hackney (the Council) in respect of her housing application, took too long to decide her medical assessment and failed to place her application in band A. She said it has caused and continues to cause her and her family significant distress and inconvenience living in unsuitable accommodation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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

4. I considered evidence provided by Mrs B and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Mrs B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Housing Allocations

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))
7. 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))

8. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application/ a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme.
9. The Ombudsman recognises that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council for failing to re-house someone, if it has prioritised applicants and allocated properties according to its published lettings scheme policy.

The Council’s allocations policy

10. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme with three bands of priority, A being the highest and C the lowest. To qualify for band A an applicant must need emergency rehousing, and a move is imperative to alleviate an immediate risk to the household’s wellbeing. Band A applicants will be made a direct offer of accommodation. To qualify for Band B an applicant must demonstrate they have a significant housing need.

What happened

11. Mrs B lives with her three children, one of whom has a health condition, in a two bedroom property. She has been on the Council’s housing register since 2014 waiting for larger accommodation. In 2022 the Council decided her eldest child needed a room of their own, so she was able to bid on four bedroom properties. She was in Band C.
12. In December 2023 Mrs B submitted another medical assessment as she felt she should be in a higher band.
13. In May 2024 she complained to the Council that it had not responded to her medical assessment request and that she should be in Band A as she was short of two bedrooms, one of her children had significant needs, the children were all on child protection plans and the current property was dangerous for her eldest child.
14. The Council responded to her complaint on 6 June 2024 apologising for the delay in dealing with her medical assessment and explaining that there was a large backlog.
15. Mrs B escalated her complaint to stage two. The Council responded on 24 July 2024. It apologised for the delay and said she should have been told that medical assessments were taking at least six months to process. It offered her £200 for the frustration arising from the delay.
16. On 6 August 2024 the Council completed her medical assessment. It concluded that her eldest child had significant medical needs, and her application was moved into Band B with effect from 10 December 2023. However, as the average wait for a four bedroom property in Band B was 13 years she had not missed out on any properties due to the delay in processing the medical assessment. The decision letter informed Mrs B about her right of appeal if she disagreed with the decision.
17. Mrs B complained to us.
18. In response to my enquiries the Council confirmed Mrs B had not missed out on any suitable properties. It also said it had recruited two more occupational therapists to clear the medical assessment backlog. It also explained that it did not consider Mrs B’s circumstances warranted Band A priority because the risks in the property had been adequately reduced, and the family did not need emergency rehousing.

Analysis

19. I understand Mrs B and her family are living in overcrowded accommodation and this is very stressful for them. However, the Council has prioritised her application in accordance with its housing allocations policy and increased her priority due to her eldest child’s needs. Unfortunately, the demand for housing in the area far outstrips the supply of suitable properties, particularly larger ones, so Mrs B faces a 13 year wait from December 2023 (the date her priority increased to Band B) for a larger property.
20. The Council took too long (eight months) to consider Mrs B’s medical assessment, but it has apologised for this, offered her £200 and recruited more staff to help ease the backlog. Mrs B has not missed out on any suitable accommodation during the period of delay, and I consider the action taken by the Council is an adequate remedy.
21. The Council has explained why Mrs B does not qualify for Band A priority and given her a right of appeal against that decision. I do not find fault here.

Back to top

Decision

22. I find fault causing injustice but consider the Council has already taken appropriate action to remedy the injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman