The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Ms J complained the Council caused delays in deciding her housing register application and failed to respond to her complaint as set out in its policy. She also said its housing service officers customer service was poor. We found the Council’s customer service was poor, and there were delays in deciding Ms J’s application and the Council’s complaints handling. The Council’s apology and proposed remedy to Ms J was appropriate to remedy the distress and uncertainty it caused.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms J, complained about the Council’s Housing Service Team’s handling of her application to join its housing register. She said it: caused delays in making a decision on her application; did not contact her to ask for more information when it found her housing application was incomplete; incorrectly told her the Council would provide her with temporary accommodation, then later told her she would have to find her own private rented accommodation; and failed to respond to her complaint as set out in the Council’s complaints policy.
Ms J also said she has experienced anti-social behaviour in her privately rented accommodation since early 2022.
As a result, Ms J said she experienced distress, uncertainty and had a loss of opportunity to be housed in a suitable accommodation.
What I have and have not investigated I have considered Ms J’s complaint about the Council’s Housing Team’s handling of her housing application and her complaint since May 2021.
I have not considered Ms J’s concerns about anti-social behaviour. This is because this was not part of her complaint to the Council, and it has not had the opportunity to respond to this through its complaints process.
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) 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) 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)
How I considered this complaint
As part of my investigation, I have: considered Ms J’s complaint and the Council’s responses: discussed the complaint with Ms J; considered the information the Council provided in response to my enquiries; and considered the law, guidance and Council policy relevant to the complaint.
Ms J and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Relevant law and Policy Homelessness Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
If a council is satisfied someone is threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance it must take reasonable steps to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. This is known as the council’s prevention duty. (Housing Act 1996, Section 195) If a council is satisfied someone is homeless and eligible for assistance it must take reasonable steps to secure suitable accommodation for them. This is known as the council’s relief duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B) A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188) Council’s Housing Allocation Scheme The Council’s Allocations Scheme sets out the qualification and eligibility rules of whether an applicant is eligible to be considered to go onto its housing register.
An application that suggests current accommodation is affecting a medical condition or disability will be referred to a medical advisor or occupational therapy team depending on what is in the application.
Medical priority is awarded according to the extent the applicants health and welfare is affected by the current housing conditions. Applicants should complete a medical assessment form.
Council’s Complaints Policy The Council’s Policy sets out how it will respond to the complaints it receives. It says it will respond in writing to stage one complaints within 10 working days, and within 25 working days for stage two complaints.
What happened Ms J lived with her partner in his house. When her partner died in early 2021, his house passed to Ms J’s mother-in-law, who asked Ms J to leave the accommodation once she had found an alternative accommodation.
In May 2021 Ms J applied to the Council for help with housing through its housing register.
Ms J also agreed to try the Council’s ‘Find Your Own Scheme’ to find a suitable privately rented property. However, in Summer 2021 she viewed a property which she found unsuitable under the scheme and asked the Council to stop this process.
Ms J contacted the Council several times for an update on her application. The Council told her it had a backlog of housing application, but it would provide its decision.
Ms J’s complaint about delays In September 2021, Ms J complained to the Council about its failure to consider her housing register application.
Two weeks later the Council considered Ms J’s application. It found she was not eligible to join its housing register as she had not displayed enough evidence to proceed. Its decision explained Ms J had the right to request a review of its decision and set out the process for doing so.
In response to Ms J’s complaint, the Council told her it upheld her complaint as it had caused unnecessary delay in providing its decision on her housing register application. It apologised and explained it had since made its decision and found she was not eligible to join its register.
Ms J’s complaint about misinformation by a housing officer Ms J called the Council and spoke with a housing officer. She said the officer told her she was not eligible to join its housing register, but she would be placed in a temporary accommodation where she could reapply to join the register. She was told the Council’s Housing Solutions Team would call her back.
An officer from the Housing Solutions Team spoke with Ms J. She told her she would not be placed in temporary accommodation as her case was closed. However, the Council could assess Ms J under homelessness, but she may be housed outside the borough. As Ms J did not wish to be housed outside the borough, she said she did not want to be assessed as homeless. The Officer told her she would need to find private rented accommodation as set out in her Personal Housing Plan.
Ms J complained to the Council about its housing officer’s incorrect information. She said this had caused her a mental breakdown, which meant she had to take medicine and take time off from work.
The Council acknowledged Ms J’s feedback regarding her interactions with its housing officer. The complaints officer said she had recommended for the Housing Register Team to receive training to improve their understanding of the process.
Ms J’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her complaints The Council shared Ms J’s Personal Housing Plan and its prevention duty letter with her.
Ms J emailed the Council as she was unhappy with how its Officer had lacked empathy regarding her circumstances and her concerns about affordability of private accommodation in the area and transport costs if she lived further away. She also told the Council its officer had been rude.
In the following months, Ms J asked the Council for a response to her complaint and asked if any new privately rented properties had become available with its agents. She also asked why her file with the Council said ‘waiting for a bidding number’.
The Council told Ms J no new properties had become available but did not provide a further response to her complaint.
In late 2021 Ms J found a privately rented property through one of the Council’s agents and moved into the accommodation.
In early 2022, the Council wrote Ms J. It explained its Housing Solutions Team had closed her case in June 2021 and her housing application had been refused in Autumn 2021. It had told her to submit a homeless application as she was potentially homeless at the time.
Ms J decided to re-apply to the housing register. She included a medical questionnaire, which explained she had anxiety and depression, but she was not homeless. She also told the Council about anti-social behaviour from neighbours and residents around her flat.
A month later the Council refused Ms J’s application. It explained this was because she was already adequately housed, and it had considered her medical information but found this did not entitle her to additional priority.
Ms J remained unhappy with the Council’s handling of her housing applications, and its complaints handling. She asked the Ombudsman to consider her complaint.
In response to our enquiries, the Council confirmed it had not provided Ms J with a final complaint response, and Ms J had not sought a review of its housing decisions. We asked the Council to provide its final complaint response.
In Autumn 2022 the Council provided a further stage one response to Ms J’s complaint. It apologised for the delay in responding to her complaint and its poor handling of the customer service element housing situation. It accepted this caused her some distress and time and trouble and offered an acknowledgement payment of £430. It said it would provide all housing staff with a refresher training on the Council’s service processes and handling of customer enquiries. It also explained: it had told Ms J about a backlog in assessing housing register applications. While it had not told her that her housing application was missing information, it was her responsibility to ensure all the relevant information was provided. It had therefore not caused a service failure, and Ms J had not used her right to request a review; its housing officer had provided Ms J with information and support, but acknowledged she may not have conveyed this with empathy. It explained the officer no longer worked for the Council and the available information did not show any evidence Ms J had been misinformed; communication with its officer fell short of what it would expect, which caused Ms J some distress; and a housing officer had not given Ms J false hope when she advised her about applying for the housing register in 2022, but it apologised if there had been any misunderstandings and the upset this may have caused.
Analysis and findings Delay in Housing Register decisions?
It took the Council five months to tell Ms J about its decision she was not eligible to join its housing register. This decision was based on the application she had made, which lacked some information.
Ms J was responsible for ensuring her application was completed correctly and she provided enough information to support her application. However, she made contact with the Council several times in the five-month period, and she was not told her application missed any information. This was fault.
I would expect the Council’s officers to have told Ms J her application was incomplete, or missing information, when she asked for an update. This would have given her the opportunity to provide any information she had.
However, Ms J had the opportunity to ask the Council for a review of its decision when it told her she was not eligible to join the housing register. It was reasonable for her to exercise this right, and, on balance, this would have clarified any information the Council needed to consider her application fully.
I am also conscious Ms J did not want to be considered homeless, as this could result in her being placed away from the Council’s area, which she did not want. This meant the Council did not have a relief duty at the time, but it supported her under its prevention duty to find a private rented accommodation.
I therefore found the Council caused delays, however, the injustice Ms J experienced as a result, was limited to the uncertainty this caused.
The Council’s delayed housing register process was also a service failure. However, during Ms J’s complaint and our investigation, the Council has implemented in new allocation scheme. This included suspending its existing scheme and clearing the backlog it had in applications. It therefore no longer has backlog, and its service failure has been resolved.
Was the Customer Service poor?
The Council has agreed its officer’s handling of Ms J’s application, responses to her communication, and information was below the standard it would expect. This was therefore fault. It could not reach a finding on some parts of her complaint as its officer no longer worked for the Council, and the case records did not confirm Ms J’s concerns.
Based on the evidence available, I agreed with the Council that its officers could have handled its communication and support to Ms J better. It also appears her record referred to a bidding number, which caused her some confusion.
However, without any evidence, I cannot say the Council’s officer misinformed her about being placed in a temporary accommodation or was rude. I have also considered the email communication Ms J received. This provided her with relevant information, but as suggested by the Council, could have been more empathetic and understanding to her circumstances.
Complaints handling Ms J made two complaints to the Council; her first complaint was about the delays in providing its decision on her housing register application; and her second complaint related to its housing decision, its customer service, and the information she had received.
The Council responded to both complaint under stage one of its complaints process. However, she did not receive a further response to her escalation of her complaint until September 2022. This was fault as the Council should have provided her with its final decision within 25 working days of her request or have told her if this was not possible.
In response to my enquiries, the Council said it still has a backlog in its complaints handling for its housing service. However, it has worked on its process and productivity within the service. It also said it has a review underway which it believes will resolve its backlog. I am satisfied the Council’s proposed actions should identify and resolve its delays in its housing service’s complaints handling.
Injustice I have considered the Council’s proposed remedy of £430 to acknowledge the distress is customer service and complaints handling caused her. In reaching my view I am conscious: Ms J did not exercise her right of review for her housing decisions, it is therefore unknown whether she would have been added to the Council’s register, or whether this would have led to an offer of a property; she did not want to be considered as homeless, which limited the accommodation she would be considered for and the support she would receive; she had an accommodation throughout the process; and the Council’s officer and records cannot provide more information to reach a safe view on some parts of Ms J’s complaint.
I am therefore satisfied the apology and remedy the Council has offered is appropriate to the injustice Ms J experienced.
Agreed action
To remedy the injustice the Council caused to Ms J, the Council should, within one month of the final decision: pay Ms J £430 to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty its delayed housing application decision, and poor customer service and complaints handling caused her; Within three months of the final decision the Council should also: provide its proposed refresher training to all its housing staff on its service process and handling of customer enquiries, or evidence of this if the training has already taken place; share the outcome, or update available, of the Council’s review to resolve its housing service’s complaints handling backlog.
The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault which caused an injustice. The Council’s proposals were enough to remedy the injustice it caused.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman