Summary: We shall not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because: the complaint is late; we are unlikely to be able to reach a clear enough view about the events now; and the Council was not responsible for many of the events Mr X is concerned about.

Summary: The complaint is about a council failing to place two people in emergency housing until the day they were evicted. There was no fault by the Council because it acted in line with the Homelessness Code of Guidance.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to deal properly with him when he became homeless and failed to meet his eligible care needs. The Council has apologised for the lack of communication from its Housing Team. However, it has not addressed the failure to deal properly with Mr X’s care needs, including a failure to meet them for several days. It needs to apologise, pay financial redress and improve its working practices.

Summary: Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of its suitability review for her accommodation. We have discontinued our investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about delay by the Council in reviewing its decision on her housing need. This is because the Council has completed its review, accepted it has a housing duty to Miss X and backdated her new banding. We cannot add to this.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to end its homelessness duty to the complainant. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and there were appeal rights the complainant could have used.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about lights the complainant says are shining into his bedroom. This is because the lights were installed by the Council’s housing service and we have no power to investigate a council when it is acting as a landlord.

Summary: The Ombudsman found fault on Mr Q’s complaint about the Council’s failure to respond to correspondence about his housing application. It delayed acting when told of his change of address. It also failed to respond promptly to his review request and failed to explain it was for the complaints process, not the review process. There was no fault in its housing banding decision. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s assessment of her housing application and refusal to give her medical priority. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: Ms X complained about how the Council managed her requests to move to a larger property on the grounds of overcrowding and unsanitary conditions. The Council was not at fault.

Summary: A woman complained about the Council’s failure to re-house her to more suitable accommodation and its failure to offer appropriate support in view of her special needs. But we do not have sufficient grounds to investigate these matters. This is partly because we have already addressed some of the complaint issues in a previous investigation. In addition there is insufficient sign of fault by the Council which has caused the woman a significant injustice to warrant our further involvement in her case.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has not provided the complainant with a larger home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the response of the body which manages the Council’s social housing to her complaints about her neighbours’ behaviour. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about a council’s management of social housing and we could not achieve the outcome Mrs B wants.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint about the Council’s delay in dealing with her request for a further review of its decision to discharge its housing duty to her. This is because it is a late complaint and there are not sufficiently compelling reasons for us to consider it now.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about changes the Council proposes to make to its housing allocations scheme. This is because the changes have not been made yet, so it is too early to consider the matter. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s response to his emails about the proposed changes. This is because the Council was not at fault for the way it corresponded with Mr B.

Summary: A man complained that a charity unreasonably evicted his stepdaughter from its hostel last year and that the Council failed to take action regarding this matter. But we do not have grounds to investigate the complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council which caused the man an injustice to warrant our involvement, and we are unlikely to achieve the outcome he wants.

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s response to her request for help with disrepair in her private rented flat. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: Miss B complained the Council has failed to award her appropriate priority on the housing register, and failed to take appropriate action in respect of anti-social behaviour and harassment from her neighbours. We find no fault by the Council in these matters.