Summary: We have found the Council at fault for the delay in progressing Miss X’s housing register application. This delay caused her avoidable distress. The Council has agreed to issue the relevant report within four weeks of our final decision and if applicable, to review its decision of Miss X’s priority need.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council did not properly consider her or her son’s needs when deciding her priority band on its housing register.
2. Miss X said the Council’s decision meant they will need to stay longer in housing that is adversely affecting their health.

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 have considered Miss X’s complaint and have spoken to her about it.
6. I have also considered the Council’s response to Miss X and to my enquiries.
7. Miss X 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

Law and guidance

Housing allocations

8. The Council’s allocation scheme sets out the statutory reasonable preference priorities. These include those with a medical need to move and those living in unsanitary or otherwise unsatisfactory conditions. The Council highlights that it will only give those living in severely unsatisfactory conditions reasonable preference for housing. Applicants with these reasonable preferences will be awarded Band A urgent and high priority.
9. The Allocation Policy outlines that applicants living in private sector properties may be awarded a higher priority band for unsanitary conditions if the property has been assessed by the Council's Environmental Health Team as posing a Category 1 hazard under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System. Additionally, this higher banding is contingent upon the Council being satisfied that the landlord cannot resolve the issue within six months and that continuing to occupy the property poses a significant health risk to the applicant or a member of their household.
10. Where the Council has accepted a duty under homelessness legislation but identified no priority need, it awards a Band C non-urgent priority.

Threatened with homelessness

11. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the council on or after 3 April 2018:
• they are likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• they have been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5)

The prevention duty

12. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help the applicants to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. In deciding what steps they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

The relief duty

13. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

The main housing duty

14. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)

What happened

Housing register application

15. In February 2023, Miss X submitted an application to join the Council’s housing register. Miss X told the Council her current private sector rented accommodation had damp, mould and a mice infestation.
16. She said:
• the poor condition of the property should mean the Council should award her priority for unsatisfactory conditions, and
• as the conditions were making her and her son’s health problems worse, she should be awarded medical priority.
17. In September, the Council referred Miss X’s case to:
• the housing disrepair enforcement officer to assess the condition of the property, and
• a medical advisor who requested an environmental health report to assess whether the condition of the property was negatively affecting Miss X and her son’s medical conditions.
18. The enforcement officer visited the property and reported that the landlord had carried out some repairs to prevent mice entering the property. Miss X remained unhappy with the condition of the property. The Council visited the property again and sent a list of required repairs to the landlord.
19. The medical advisor disagreed that Miss X’s current accommodation was adversely affecting her health and therefore the Council did not award her medical priority.
20. In October 2023, the Council awarded Miss X Band D, no priority. Miss X requested a review of the Council’s banding decision.

Homelessness application

21. Miss X approached the Council in February 2024. She said her landlord had served her a Section 21 notice. The Council accepted the prevention duty and amended her housing register priority to Band C.

Housing allocation review

22. A week later, the Council issued its allocation review decision. It upheld its decision, confirming that Miss X did not meet the criteria for additional medical priority.

Complaint

23. Miss X complained that her accommodation was in an unsatisfactory condition and the landlord was not dealing with the issues. She said she should be awarded higher priority on the housing register. In its response, the Council said that its environmental health team was working with her landlord to resolve the issues. It said that the Council would need to determine that the property poses a category 1 hazard under the Housing and Safety Rating System for it to be a considerable risk to Miss X’s health.
24. Miss X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Update

25. In August 2024, the Council visited the property again to assess its condition. Following this visit, the Council offered Miss X interim accommodation and notified her that it had ended its prevention duty and accepted the relief duty.
26. Miss X and her family moved into interim accommodation in August 2024 but chose to move back to the original property 2 weeks later.
27. The Council accepted the main homeless duty in October and offered Miss X self-contained temporary accommodation in November. Miss X refused the offer on the basis that it was too far away form her support network.
28. In response to my enquiries, the Council said it was currently awaiting the Environmental Health report to confirm the hazard category. It said once this evidence is received, it will review the priority banding and will amend the application accordingly. It said, if applicable, the revised banding may be backdated to the date of the Environmental Health report.

My findings

29. The Council delayed action on Miss X’s housing register application.
30. She approached the Council in February 2023 and the Council did not make the referrals to the medical advisor or housing repair enforcement officer until September that year.
31. The Council is still awaiting the Environmental Health report to determine the hazard category of the property and whether this would result in Miss X’s being award a priority banding.
32. These delays amount to fault. The fault caused Miss X distress from the uncertainty of not knowing whether she was eligible for a higher priority banding.
33. I cannot say whether the delay caused Miss X to continue living in unsatisfactory conditions as the Environmental Health report had not been issued at the time of my decision.

Back to top

Agreed action

34. Within 4 weeks of my decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Miss X for the delay in progressing her housing register application.
2. Pay Miss X £200 for the distress caused by the delays and the uncertainty this caused.
3. Issue the Environmental Health report on the condition of her property.
4. If applicable, review its decision of Miss X’s banding based on the results of the Environmental Health report.
35. If the findings of the Environmental Health report result in Miss X’s banding being amended, the Council should backdate Miss X’s priority date to the date of her original housing register application (February 2023) to take account of the delays in referring the application the relevant officers.
36. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

37. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault with the Council for the delay in progressing Miss X’s housing register application.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman