Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s policy of housing vulnerable homeless people with allegedly unsuitable private landlords. This is because the Council is entitled to set its own policies and it is unlikely further investigation would achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint. This is because we have no jurisdiction to investigate social housing landlords and the investigation was subject to court proceedings in 2020. We have no jurisdiction to consider any matter which has been considered by a court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a private lease agreement. It is reasonable for the complainant to seek a remedy in the courts which are better placed to determine legal liability and contractual matters.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council is handling the complainants Right to Buy application. This is because it is reasonable to expect her to use the remedy available to her via the courts.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about a lack of privacy from a Council property on his boundary. This is because it relates to the Council’s management of its social housing which lies outside our legal remit.

Summary: there was fault in the way the Council considered Miss X’s request for a review of the suitability of a final offer of accommodation made to end the main housing duty. The Council was also at fault for not responding promptly to her first request for help to bid for properties advertised on its choice-based lettings scheme. These faults caused injustice to Miss X. The Council has agreed to provide a suitable remedy.

Summary: Miss B complained the Council did not properly address her concerns about the suitability of her temporary accommodation. We find there was a delay in the Council providing Miss B with suitable alternative temporary accommodation. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused.

Summary: The Council was at fault for not reviewing Ms X’s banding on its housing allocations scheme sooner. This caused injustice to Ms X as she would have received higher priority at an earlier date. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and backdate the effective date of her higher priority to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: A woman complained about the Council’s failure to rehouse her family despite their serious overcrowding, and about the way it dealt with her case when she had to flee her home due to domestic abuse. But we will not investigate these matters. This is because the woman has complained late about events after she fled her home. In addition there is no sign that any fault in the Council’s handling of the woman’s housing application and complaint caused her an injustice to warrant our further involvement.

Summary: Mr X and Mrs X complained the Council did not properly assess their family’s health needs when considering their housing application. The Ombudsman finds the Council was at fault for not increasing their banding after it decided they were homeless. However that did not cause Mr and Mrs X an injustice. It also incorrectly told them they were not on the Housing Register when it responded to their complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr and Mrs X for avoidable confusion and distress that caused. It has already proposed further training for staff about prioirty banding.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council was at fault in the way it dealt with her housing situation since 2018 and a homelessness application. We found fault as the Council delayed in deciding whether it owed Ms X a main housing duty and it failed to set up a rent account for storing her belongings. But these faults have not caused Ms X an injustice, so we have completed our investigation.

Summary: The Ombudsman exercised discretion to discontinue the investigation of Ms B’s complaint about how the Council left her in unsuitable temporary accommodation with little support, failed to make adaptations to it, removed her from its housing register, and failed to act on reports of vermin. This is because she has withdrawn the complaint.

Summary: Mr B complained about the Council’s involvement in the decision that the property where he was living was unsafe which meant he could no longer live there. He said the Council failed to provide any accommodation for him while it considered his application as homeless. And failed to help him to find accommodation and decided he was not in priority need. He said the Council failed to deal with his requests for a review of the decisions. As a result he had no accommodation for over nine months and had to sleep in his car. There was fault that caused injustice to Mr B. The Council will apologise, make a payment to him, reissue the decision and take other action to ensure the errors will not recur.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide her with timely and suitable support after her landlord illegally evicted her. There was no fault in how the council helped Miss X with her complaint of illegal eviction. There was fault with how the Council encouraged Miss X to withdraw her application when considering her homelessness, however this did not cause Miss X a significant injustice. The Council agreed to issue reminders to its housing officers to prevent similar fault in future.

Summary: Ms X complained about the way the Council handled her homelessness application and her complaint about that. There were faults in the way the Council considered Ms X’s application. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X and pay her £300 for the uncertainty caused by the fault. The Council also agreed to remind its staff of the correct test to apply when considering its duty to provide interim accommodation.

Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint. This is because the complainant has not provided enough information for us to proceed.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to make a decision on Ms B’s homelessness application made in February 2020. The Council’s failure meant Ms B and her family lived with the threat of eviction from their privately rented property for longer than if the Council had acted as it should. They also had to pay court costs. There was fault which caused injustice to Ms B. The action taken by the Council is a satisfactory resolution of the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the allocation of a social housing property and Mrs X’s request for a transfer to a larger flat. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. Mrs X is a tenant of a social housing landlord and we cannot consider complaints about tenancy matters or allocations which are outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms X’s housing situation. This is because it is too late now to investigate what happened a number of years ago and we cannot investigate her current complaint about her social housing because this matter falls under the authority of the Housing Ombudsman.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not adding the complainant to the housing register seven years ago. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about housing standards enforcement action taken by the Council against Mr X. This is because Mr X had a right of appeal to a Residential Property Tribunal which we would reasonably expected him to have used.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to end its homelessness duty in a woman’s case because she turned down an offer of accommodation. This is because the Council has now withdrawn its decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has not agreed to move the complainant’s housing application into a higher priority band. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s decision to remove her housing application from the housing register when she failed to return the annual renewal form. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.