The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr X complains about the time it took the Council to support his stepson into suitable housing, thereby endangering both he and his wife. We have concluded our investigation having made a finding of fault by the Council. Although the Council took reasonable steps to alleviate any immediate danger that Mr Y presented, we found it failed to act on evidence provided to it that demonstrated receipt of Disability Living Allowance (DLA). Further, we found the Council failed to make a referral to social care services when it had enough information to do so. Mr Y should have been referred for a sheltered accommodation assessment sooner and this caused an injustice to Mr and Mrs X. The Council has agreed to the recommendations proposed
The complaint
Mr X complains about the length of time it took the Council to support his stepson into suitable housing. Mr X says both he and his wife were in ongoing danger due to delays from the Council. Mr X would also like the Council to provide a financial remedy for the ongoing stress and danger he says the Council put he and Mrs X in.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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) If we are satisfied with a council’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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him. I also considered the Council’s comments on the complaint and the supporting information it provided. I offered Mr X and the Council an opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered their comments before making a final decision.
What I found
Relevant legislation and guidance Housing allocations 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.
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)) The Council’s Homestep scheme A scheme used by the Council to assist clients with securing them accommodation in the private rented sector. The Council offer financial support in the form of an advanced rent payment and five weeks damage deposit.
Disability Living Allowance Disability Living Allowance is a benefit paid to eligible claimants who have personal care and/or mobility needs as a result of a mental or physical disability.
Sheltered accommodation and extra care housing As per the NHS, sheltered housing is for people who are normally able to live quite independently, but need occasional help or support. Often, sheltered housing will have a warden who you can be called on in an emergency, as well as other security features like emergency alarm systems. Sheltered housing properties may also have communal facilities such as a laundry, lounge and garden, as well as offering social activities and events. The level of support on offer varies depending on the individual scheme.
Extra care housing (also called "assisted living" or "very sheltered housing") offers more support than sheltered accommodation. You live in a self-contained flat, but you may have services provided by on-site staff, such as meals or personal care and domestic support.
Background
Colchester Borough Council were responsible for Mr Y’s housing and homelessness applications. Essex County Council were responsible for any social care support and relevant assessments that took place.
What happened I have included a summary below of the key events that took place. This is not intended to be a detailed version of events.
Mr X lives with his wife, Mrs X. Mrs X has a son, Mr Y who has some health problems. In the lead up to events mentioned below, Mr Y was permanently living with Mr and Mrs X.
In early March 2021, Mr X submitted a housing application for Mr Y. Mr X told the Council his wife was awaiting a formal diagnosis regarding her health and that he was preparing for the future. Mr X explained that should the situation worsen, Mr Y would lose out on support and care that he would no longer be able to provide.
Later in March 2021, following a seizure related to Mr Y’s health problems, he attacked Mr X. Concerned for the safety of himself and Mrs X, Mr X no longer wanted Mr Y to live in the property and so he contacted the Council for advice.
In a discussion I held with Mr X, he advised that the Council offered to place Mr Y into temporary accommodation. Mr X says he declined the Council’s offer, as he felt it would not take the Council too long to place Mr Y and that it was more appropriate to find a long-term solution. The Council told Mr X that it would undertake its initial assessment in April 2021.
In April 2021, following the Council’s initial assessment, it told Mr X it would be undertaking a further assessment in May 2021 and that he should send it a letter confirming Mr Y as homeless. Mr X says he was sent a check list of documents to send back to the Council. Mr X says he queried the Council about the information it wanted and was told to ignore the request.
In the middle of April 2021, Mr X contacted the Council to advise it that that Mr Y could no longer live at the property.
The second assessment was undertaken at the beginning of May 2021. The Council referred the case to adult social care services at Essex County Council for further assessment. The Council suspended Mr Y’s housing application under its allocations policy, citing its need to undertake its own risk assessment.
The Council requested copies of Mr Y’s bank statements and details of any savings he held. Mr X says the Council told him it could help Mr Y and because he was advised support would be forthcoming, he stopped looking at rental options for Mr Y.
Later in May 2021, Mr Y advised the Council he was in receipt of Disability Living Allowance (DLA). The Council emailed Mr X asking for proof of DLA so it could refer his application for a sheltered accommodation assessment.
At the end of May 2021, the Council confirmed receipt of Mr Y’s bank statements. The Council told Mr X that Mr Y would not qualify for its Homestep scheme given the funds he held. The Council acknowledged that private rented accommodation was unlikely to be an option for Mr Y given his support and care needs.
In June 2021, Mr X contacted the Council for an update. The Council told Mr X that it was still awaiting proof of DLA. Mr X says he explained to the Council that the bank statements he had sent it demonstrated receipt of DLA.
Later in June 2021, the Council wrote to Mr Y asking him to contact it so it could undertake a risk assessment.
In the middle of July 2021, the Council received Mr Y’s savings statement and his housing application was reassessed as a Band D. The Council wrote to Mr X confirming that Mr Y’s application had been reactivated.
Later in July 2021, the Council produced its Personalised Housing Plan in response to Mr X advising it that Mr Y could no longer live at the property.
Toward the end of July 2021, Mr Y’s social worker confirmed that Mr Y met the Social Care Act 2014 eligibility as he was unable to achieve two or more of the outcomes detailed in the legislation. The social worker also confirmed that no mental capacity assessment had been completed and that there was no care plan in place. The Council confirmed to Mr X that it had suspended Mr Y’s application as per its allocations policy, citing Mr Y’s care needs and ability to manage in a general needs tenancy. The Council undertook a sheltered accommodation assessment.
At the end of July 2021, the Council received the social care assessment. The assessment outlined that temporary accommodation and general needs accommodation would not be suitable for Mr Y, and that the Council should source more appropriate accommodation with support.
In August 2021, Mr Y’s social worker wrote to the Council confirming his support plan and suitability for sheltered accommodation.
In September 2021, the Council placed a bid for extra care sheltered housing and Mr Y was successfully placed.
Analysis Mr X complains about the length of time it took to place Mr Y into suitable accommodation which he says left both he and Mrs X in ongoing danger. I have therefore considered how the Council’s actions may have contributed to this.
Did the Council take reasonable steps to alleviate any immediate danger?
The Council says that at any time where accommodation is required as a matter of urgency, it has a duty to provide temporary accommodation. The Council were notified in March 2021 that Mr Y had attacked Mr X.
Although I have not been able to obtain a record of the conversation, Mr X says when he first discussed matters in March 2021 with the Council, it offered to place Mr Y into temporary accommodation. Mr X said he declined the Council’s offer in preference of finding a long-term solution for Mr Y. I have therefore found that by offering to place Mr Y into temporary accommodation, the Council took reasonable steps to alleviate any immediate danger to Mr and Mrs X.
Mr X says had he have been aware it would have taken the Council more time to place Mr Y into suitable accommodation, he would have accepted the Council’s offer. Although I have not made a finding of fault, given the circumstances it would have been appropriate for the Council to have better informed Mr X of the potential time it may take to place Mr Y. This would have allowed Mr X to make an informed decision about the appropriateness of Mr Y remaining in his property.
Did the Council correctly process housing and homelessness applications for Mr Y?
Housing application After the Council undertook its initial assessment in April 2021, it sent Mr X a checklist of information it wanted, including Mr Y’s bank statements, but later advised Mr X to ignore the request. Following the second assessment, the Council made another request for Mr Y’s bank statements. Once the Council reviewed Mr Y’s bank statements in May 2021, it determined there were limits to the support that could be provided as he was able to fund his own accommodation.
It is not clear why the Council advised Mr X not to send the information outlined in the checklist in April 2021. Had the Council asked Mr X to send Mr Y’s bank statements in the first instance, it could have informed Mr X earlier about any limits to the support available to Mr Y. Whilst it is acknowledged that the Council misadvised Mr X about whether or not to send it information, I do not consider this delay to be significant as to make a finding of fault.
The Council were made aware that Mr Y was in receipt of DLA, thus making Mr Y eligible to be considered for sheltered accommodation. The Council asked for evidence in May 2021 that Mr Y was in receipt of DLA. When Mr X contacted the Council, he told it that the bank statements he had previously sent it demonstrated receipt of DLA.
From the evidence available to me, I cannot see that the Council actioned this information. The Council did not refer the case so a sheltered accommodation assessment could be undertaken. A sheltered accommodation assessment was not carried out until July 2021.
Had the Council acted on the evidence Mr X supplied which demonstrated receipt of DLA, Mr Y could have been referred for a sheltered accommodation assessment. Once Mr Y was assessed for sheltered accommodation, he was successfully placed. I therefore find fault in the Council’s failure to action evidence provided to it by Mr X. This resulted in a sheltered assessment not being carried out until two months later where Mr Y was successfully placed. This fault caused Mr and Mrs X an injustice, as they remained in a living environment, fearful of their safety and the wellbeing of Mr Y, whereby the duration could have been reduced had the Council acted on evidence it held.
Homelessness application After Mr X contacted the Council in May 2021 to advise it that Mr Y could no longer live in the property, the Council wrote to Mr Y with its assessment, a Personalised Housing Plan, an outlined its duty and responsibilities.
Following receipt of the social care assessment and evidence of Mr Y’s care needs, the Council closed its homelessness case for Mr Y given its unsuitability as an option. I have not found fault in how the Council processed Mr X’s homelessness application.
Did the Council make a referral to social care services when it should have?
When Mr X contacted the Council in March 2021 to submit a housing application, he told it that Mr Y had health problems, and that he cared for Mr Y, taking responsibility for his cooking and washing.
When the Council undertook its initial assessment, Mr X informed it of the attack by Mr Y. Despite being aware of the attack and that Mr X cared for Mr Y, the Council did not make a referral to social care services for an assessment. The Council acknowledges that in its initial assessment, it did not identify that Mr Y could not live independently. It was only after the second assessment in May 2021 did the Council refer the matter to social care services.
The Council is correct when it says it could not act without further information from social care services about Mr Y’s circumstances, which were the responsibility of Essex County Council. However, it had the opportunity in April 2021 to make a referral to social care services but it did not, and this amounts to fault leading to an injustice.
Had the Council referred the case at an earlier opportunity, Mr Y may have been placed into suitable housing earlier. The initial assessment took place in April 2021, and the second assessment in May 2021 when the referral was made.
The Council received notification of a requirement for care or support in August 2021, when it received assessments for Mr Y for his mental capacity, a support plan, and a best interest report. Once the Council were informed of Mr Y’s suitability for sheltered accommodation, it placed a bid in September 2021.
In the Council’s stage 2 response letter, it advised that staff would receive a briefing to help them identify applicants who may have a specialist housing need.
Agreed actions
To resolve the complaint, and prevent similar issues occurring, the Council has agreed to: Explain what it will do to ensure evidence it receives as part of any application is considered and used as appropriate.
Pay Mr X an amount of £300 in recognition of the stress and trouble incurred from the ongoing living situation the Council could have otherwise reduced.
The Council has agreed to complete action a within two months of the Ombudsman’s final decision, and action b within one month of the Ombudsman’s final decision.
Final decision
I have concluded my investigation having made a finding of fault by the Council. Although the Council took reasonable steps to alleviate any immediate danger that Mr Y presented, I found it failed to act on evidence provided to it that demonstrated receipt of DLA. Further, I found the Council failed to make a referral to social care services when it had enough information to do so. Mr Y should have been referred for a sheltered accommodation assessment sooner and this caused an injustice to Mr and Mrs X. The Council has agreed to our proposed recommendations.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman