Summary: Ms K complained about the Council’s handling of a Notice to Quit for her temporary accommodation, delay in increasing her priority band, and refusal to give her medical priority. We found the Council at fault for failing to properly inform Ms K about the Notice to Quit process and causing delay in increasing her priority band and complaints handling. The Council should apologise and make payment to remedy the injustice this caused. There was no fault in the process it followed to reach its view Ms K was not entitled to medical priority, we cannot therefore criticise the merits of its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms K, complained about the Council’s handling of her housing application. She said:
• it had failed to increase her priority band when it said it would and she had not been provided permanent accommodation for over 10 years despite actively bidding;
• it had communicated poorly and caused delays regarding serving a Notice to Quit; and
• its complaints handling was poor and delayed.
2. Ms K also complained disrepair of her temporary accommodation and housing issues before 2022.
3. As a result, Ms K said she experienced distress due to the uncertainty the Council’s actions and delays caused. She also said this caused delay in being housed permanently.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

4. I have considered Ms K’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her Notice to Quit and priority banding since May 2022.
5. I have not investigated Ms K’s concerns about:
• the Council’s handling of its allocations scheme from before 2022. This is because these matters are late, and I have seen no good reason to exercise my discretion; and
• disrepair or mice in her temporary accommodation. This is because this was not part of her complaint to the Council, it has therefore not had the opportunity to address this with the managing agent or through its complaints process.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

6. 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)
7. 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)
8. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
9. 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

10. As part of my investigation, I have:
• considered Ms K’s complaint and the Council’s responses;
• discussed the complaint with Ms K and considered the information she provided;
• considered the information the Council provided in response to our enquiries;
• considered the relevant law and policy to the complaint.
11. Ms K and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Council’s Housing Allocation policy

12. 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))
13. The Council’s housing allocation policy is available online.
14. Those joining the housing register are given a bedroom category and placed in one of four bandings.
15. Where the applicant seeks priority on medical grounds the following bandings apply:
• Band A is reserved for when the applicant or a member of the household has a life-threatening condition that is seriously affected by their housing or where the housing conditions and or/other circumstances are having such a major adverse medical condition of the tenant or members of the household as to warrant emergency priority.
• Band B is awarded where the current housing conditions are having a major adverse effect on the medical condition on the applicant or a member of the household.
• Band C is awarded where the current housing conditions are having an adverse effect on the medical condition of the applicant or member of the household with a particular need to move.
16. Applicants who indicate they have an illness or disability which is affected by their current home are referred to the Council’s medical adviser for recommendations. If there is an adverse effect due to current housing, the medical adviser will consider whether the overall effect on the household is sufficiently severe to warrant recommendation for inclusion in a higher band.
17. Appendix B of the policy explains the Council offers a review of any decisions related to the housing register, including banding. Such requests must be received within 21 days of the notification.

What happened

18. Ms K joined the Council’s housing register over 10 years ago. She was assessed to be entitled to a three-bedroom property to meet the needs of her and her two children.
19. Ms K said her family has been moved several times between temporary accommodations since, and in 2019 the Council moved them to a three-bedroom temporary accommodation managed by an agent.
20. In 2021 the Council offered her a permanent accommodation for a three-bedroom maisonette. Ms K said she refused the offer as it did not have any on-site parking or street parking nearby. She said she needed this to take her daughter to school, and to hospital appointments for her medical conditions.
21. Ms K said she continued to bid for properties through the Council’s allocations scheme with her Band C priority but was unsuccessful.

Ms K’s request for increased priority

22. In 2022 Ms K asked the Council for more priority under its allocations scheme. She explained:
• she had waited for over 10 years to be house permanently;
• her daughter’s medical circumstances had worsened as she had more seizures and had required hospitalisations more frequently; and
• paramedics who attended their property to take her daughter to hospital had difficulties bringing her down from the first-floor bedrooms due to the narrow landing and steep stairs.
23. The Council’s housing officer told Ms K it could not allocate accommodations outside its scheme and many applicants were wishing to be housed, but she could complete a new medical change of circumstances for it to consider.
24. Ms K submitted the form and included some medical information which explained what her daughter’s medical conditions were.
25. The Council shared Ms K’s medical information with its Medical Adviser, who did not agree more priority should be granted. The Council wrote Ms K and explained it had considered its Medical Adviser’s view and agreed her current priority Band C was appropriate. It also told her if she wanted medical priority reviewed again, she had 21 days to do so and would need to provide more medical evidence of how her daughter’s conditions impact her housing need.

Notice to quit and priority

26. In May 2022, the housing officer told Ms K the Council would no longer work with the agent managing the temporary accommodation. It was therefore going to serve her with a Notice to Quit her temporary accommodation, which she expected to be in a few weeks. She explained the Council had a duty to house Ms K and would increase her priority to Band B.
27. Ms K said she received a letter and a visit from another managing agent. It explained it would take over the management of Ms K’s accommodation.
28. Over the following two months, Ms K asked the Council for updates about the Notice to Quit and the increase in her Priority Band. She sent several emails to the housing officer, who apologised for the delay in serving the notice.
29. The Council shared its Notice to Quit with Ms K in late July 2022. Its housing officer also said she expected the Priority Band to be increased shortly.
30. Ms K was concerned about the Notice to Quit as she feared she would need to leave when it expired. She asked the housing officer when her priority band would be increased again.
31. The Housing Officer told Ms K she would not have to leave when the notice expired as the eviction process could take some time, and the Council had a duty to house her regardless. She also said Ms K’s priority Band would first be changed when the Notice to Quit expired.
32. The Council changed Ms K’s priority to Band B a week before the Notice to Quit expired.
33. In October 2022 the new management agent for Ms K’s temporary accommodation sent her a new three-year tenancy agreement.
34. The Council told Ms K she should sign the tenancy agreement and it reduced her priority to Band C again.

Ms K’s complaint

35. Ms K complained to the Council about its delay and communication regarding its Notice to Quit and her priority Band increase. She was also unhappy she had been bidding for permanent accommodation over 10 years without success and her mental health had been impacted.
36. In its responses the Council told Ms K it partially upheld her complaint as it had not fully explained the Notice to Quit process to her until August 2022, which it accepted caused confusion around leaving the accommodation. However, it found it;
• had correctly issued its Notice to Quit and awarded priority Band B;
• had correctly reduced her priority Band to her original Band C when the managing agent changed, which was why she had received a new tenancy to sign; and
• it acknowledged Ms K had been actively bidding for a long time without success, but this was not uncommon for applicants with Band C priority due to the waiting time for properties to become available. It suggested other ways to find housing quicker; and
• it suggested Ms K submitted a medical request form with evidence how her mental health impacted her housing needs for it to consider.
37. Ms K was not satisfied with the Council’s response. She asked the Ombudsman to consider her complaint. She also said:
• she had begun to sell or give away her belongings when she was served the Notice to Quit as she did not know where she would be living;
• the Council caused delays in its complaints handling, and
• her temporary accommodation had issues with damp, leaking roof, electrical faults, and mice.

Analysis and findings

Request for medical priority

38. Ms K requested medical priority due to her daughter’s medical conditions. She provided some medical evidence to support her request.
39. I found the Council’s followed its policy and referred Ms K’s request and evidence to its medical adviser for recommendations. The Council considered the medical adviser’s recommendations and agreed Ms K had not shown enough evidence to justify priority for higher banding under medical priority.
40. I understand Ms K did not agree with the Council’s decision and would have liked more information about the reasons for the refusal. However, I have seen no fault in the process the Council followed, I cannot therefore criticise the merits of its decision.
41. Ms K did not ask the Council for a review of its decision. This is likely to be because she knew the Council was due to serve a Notice to Quit. However, she has the right to request medical priority again based on the impact her temporary accommodation has on her daughters, or her own, health conditions.

Suitability of Ms K’s temporary accommodation

42. Ms K told the Council about concerns regarding her temporary accommodation as part of her medical priority request in 2022. She said paramedics attending the property struggled to access the first-floor bedrooms and bring her daughter down with their equipment.
43. While this was not part of Ms K’s complaint to the Council, I have seen no evidence the Council provided information to her about her right to request a suitability review of her temporary accommodation. This was fault.
44. However, I am not satisfied this caused Ms K additional injustice. This is because it is unlikely, she would have made a suitability review request considering she was aware the Council was intending to serve a Notice to Quit and move her elsewhere.
45. In the end, Ms K did not move from the temporary accommodation as the managing agent changed. The Council should therefore inform her about her right to request a suitability review, and if Ms K decides to do so, it should provide her with its decision on this matter.

Notice to Quit and communication

The Council accepted its housing officer had failed to properly inform Ms K about the process around its Notice to Quit until August 2022. It explained this was due to poor communication between its Housing and Temporary Accommodations team.

46. I found the Council:
• failed to properly inform Ms K about the Notice to Quit and eviction process over a two-month period. This is because it should have provided the advice it gave in August 2022 when it told her it would serve a Notice to Quit in May 2022;
• caused delays in serving the Notice to Quit to Ms K as it repeatedly said it would do so during the two-month period but failed to keep the timescales it gave; and
• failed to increase her priority to Band B when it said it would.
47. I am satisfied Ms K experienced unnecessary distress due to the uncertainty around when she would have to leave her accommodation, and where she would live with her children. I found the Council’s apology was not enough to remedy the distress this caused her.
48. However, I am not satisfied her injustice includes:
• disposing of her belongings during the Notice to Quit period. While I understand why Ms K sold or gave away items during this period, I cannot fault the Council for her decision to do so; and
• a delay for Ms K to be housed permanently. This is because I cannot say whether Ms K would have been successful in bidding for permanent accommodation during the short period she should have been in priority Band B.

Complaints handling

49. The Council responded to Ms K’s complaints through its complaints process. Although its final complaint response was delayed, it followed its policy and told Ms K accordingly and provided a new date it would respond by.
50. However, the Council’s final response was dated to have been written within the extended timescale, but it was not made available to Ms K until two weeks later. This was fault, which caused her some limited distress and delay in bringing her concerns to the Ombudsman’s attention.

Back to top

Agreed action

51. To remedy the injustice the Council caused to Ms K, the Council should, within one month of the final decision:
1. apologise in writing to Ms K and pay her £150 to acknowledge the distress she experienced as a result of its poor communication, and delays in its handling of the Notice to Quit and complaints handling caused her;
2. advise Ms K about her right to request a suitability review of her temporary accommodation.
52. Within three months of the final decision the Council should also:
1.  
2.  
3. review how it can improve information sharing between its Housing and Temporary Accommodation Team to ensure changes in Notice to Quit processes are communicated without delay to applicants; and
4. remind officers to adhere to timescales agreed with applicants to respond, take actions, or seek approvals from managers to avoid unnecessary uncertainty or heightened expectations.
53. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

54. There was fault which caused an injustice. The Council has agreed with my recommendations, it is on this basis I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman