Summary: Ms X complains the Council breached an agreement to pay her rent shortfall as part of an agreement for her to care for two children as a special guardian. She also believes the Council was wrong to inform her she was only able to bid for a two bedroom property. She says the Council caused her an injustice by its lack of adherence to the terms of the agreement. She says she had to borrow money to meet the shortfall the Council failed to pay and has now been evicted. The Ombudsman does not find the Council at fault.

Summary: there was no fault in the way the Council dealt with Miss X’s Housing Register application and prioritised her bids for properties. Its decision not to proceed with an offer to move Miss X to a hostel in its area was not taken with fault.

Summary: Mrs X complains on behalf of her daughter Miss Y about the way the Council handled her housing application. She says it did not follow its Allocations Policy before deciding her daughter was not eligible to join the housing register. She says her daughter feels her medical needs justify the allocation of a place on the register and wants the Council to reconsider her case. The Ombudsman finds the Council was at fault for not informing Miss Y why it rejected her application or how she could appeal its decision. It was also at fault for failing to acknowledge or respond to some of the correspondence and information submitted by Mrs X and for providing conflicting information about whether special circumstances could be considered in Miss Y’s case. The Council has already acted to remedy the injustice that Mrs X and Miss Y were caused by these faults. However, the Council has agreed to make some service improvements to prevent them from reoccurring.

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

Summary: The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint about the Council not moving the occupant of Ms X’s rented property. This is because it would be reasonable for Ms X or her managing agent to take court action against the Council if necessary.

Summary: Ms X has complained about how the Council dealt with her homelessness application. There is evidence of fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot pursue this complaint about various matters related to Miss B’s tenancy. This is because the Ombudsman does not have power to investigate complaints about the Council’s management of its social housing.

Summary: A man complained that the Council had deceived him and the Ombudsman in its response to a complaint he made in 2017, by withholding relevant documents. But the Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint as it is unlikely we would find fault with the Council or that we could achieve a worthwhile outcome.

Summary: The Ombudsman found fault on Mrs T’s complaint about the Council failing to properly assesses her housing transfer application. It failed to properly consider whether she was housebound under its policy and nor did it give reasons for decisions. The agreed action remedies the avoidable injustice caused. The Ombudsman found no fault on her complaint about it failing to tell her of a suitable property. The landlord had a restriction about pets and Mrs T stated on her application she would not make alternative arrangements for her dog.

Summary: The Council is at fault as it placed Miss X and her family in unsuitable accommodation which caused distress and inconvenience to her. The Council has agreed to remedy Miss X’s injustice by apologising to her and making a payment of £975 to her.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council failed to consider all the relevant information when reaching its decision to decline his application to join the Housing Register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the handling of the complainant’s housing register and homelessness applications. This is because the Council has already provided a fair remedy and because there were review rights the complainant could have used.

Summary: Ms T complains that there was fault in the way the Council responded to her concerns about disrepair in her privately rented house. The Ombudsman is satisfied the Council acted appropriately by liaising with the landlord to get repairs completed. The Council was at fault in that it delayed significantly in responding to Ms T’s complaint. But this did not alter the outcome and the Council has apologised so the Ombudsman will not pursue this issue further.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr A’s complaint that the Council failed to reimburse the losses he incurred and about the way the Council has dealt with the matter. This is because it is reasonable to expect him to go to court to seek a remedy.