Summary: There is no fault by the Council. It is willing to carry out the remedy agreed on a previous complaint but is unable to do so without the complainant making contact.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s band on the housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Miss C complains about the way the Council dealt with her approach to it about threatened homelessness. In particular, she complains about the conduct of an officer who interviewed her. The Ombudsman does not have the evidence to uphold the complaint about what happened in the interview. But we uphold a complaint that the Council did not refer Miss C’s contact on for a homeless assessment.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about an alleged threat by the complainant in a telephone call to the Council. There would be no worthwhile outcome as the Ombudsman could not prove what the complainant said in the call. If the complainant believes the Council has breached data protection legislation he should complain to the Information Commissioner.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaints about the way the Council is handling her right to buy application. It is reasonable to expect Ms B to use the legal remedies available to her.

Summary: Ms B complains the Council gave her incorrect housing advice which she relied on to her detriment. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because while the Council was at fault in giving her wrong advice, we cannot say now what position Ms B would have been in had she not been given it, and an investigation by the Ombudsman will not achieve the outcome Ms B seeks.

Summary: There was fault by the Council. It decided that Miss B was not threatened with homelessness but it did not tell her that she had a right to ask it to review its decision. Miss B does not agree that it is reasonable for her to stay in her current tenancy and so she lost the opportunity to seek a review. The Council has reviewed its processes and trained staff. It has agreed that it will also apologise to Miss B, invite her to request a review of its decision and complete its review within one month of her request.

Summary: Miss B complains about the Council’s lack of housing help when she and her two children were made homeless. Miss B says the Council offered her unsuitable interim accommodation which resulted in her sleeping in a tent, and did not accept the main housing duty. The Council was not at fault for the matters Miss B complains about and it was reasonable for Miss B to use her review and appeal rights to challenge the Council’s decision. But, the Council should have offered Miss B short term accommodation when it made its decision on her homelessness application. The Council has agreed to now make this offer. So, we have completed our investigation.

Summary: Mr B complained the Council unreasonably pursued him about disrepair issues at a property he rents out, exaggerated the issues, failed to give him an opportunity to put his side and failed to consider his representations. There is no fault in how the Council dealt with this case.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s banding on the housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.