Summary
Mr C had applied to be re-housed. His application was also assessed for priority housing as he said he was being harassed in his current home. Mr C complained that there was a delay in processing his application, and was unhappy with a council visit to his home. He felt that the visiting council officer had been unprepared and he had concerns about the questions asked and the advice given. In addition, he was dissatisfied with the decision reached on his application for priority and the way he was advised of the decision. He was also unhappy that a council officer had contacted another department after he had been asked not to do so.
We did not uphold Mr C's complaints. During our investigation we found that, while there was delay in processing a request for information about the allegation of harassment, there had been no delay in processing his application for housing. Mr C's name was added to the council's housing list in line with their target timescales.
The evidence we saw also showed that after the council received all the information, including information from the police, they told Mr C their decision on his priority within their target timescales. While there was no evidence of anything having gone wrong in the council's handling of the issues raised, they had apologised for the distress and unsatisfactory service Mr C felt he had received, and for any confusion or misleading information received from officers with regard to his priority. The council had also apologised for the delay in processing the request for information and explained to us the action they had taken as a result of Mr C's case.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201102765 as a PDF (11.42 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018