Summary: Miss X complains the Council delayed deciding her mother’s homelessness application and placed her family in unsuitable accommodation. Miss X says this caused her and her family significant distress and caused them to live in unsuitable accommodation for longer than necessary. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for failing to explore whether Miss X’s mother was entitled to further support, and for delaying its decision about its housing duty. The Ombudsman also finds fault with the Council for failing to consider the suitability of the temporary accommodation it offered. The Council has agreed a financial remedy and service improvements.

Summary: Mr X complains about the length of time it is taking the Council to rehouse him. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s actions regarding her housing application. She said the Council’s actions adversely affected her and her daughter’s health and caused avoidable distress to the family. We found some fault by the Council in this matter and recommend a remedy to address the injustice caused.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council placed him in unsuitable temporary accommodation which he could not afford. He also said it failed to process his housing benefit claim which led to significant rent arrears and the Council placing a charge on a property he owns. There was no fault in the Council’s decision to place him in the temporary accommodation. The Council has already accepted it was at fault for the delay in dealing with his housing benefit application and has offered a suitable remedy for this. I cannot consider the Council’s decision to place a charging order on Mr X’s property as the court has already considered this matter.

Summary: there was fault in the way the Council handled Miss X’s request for homelessness assistance. This caused Miss X and her family significant distress and the Council has agreed to provide a suitable remedy.

Summary: Miss X complained about the way the Council dealt with her homelessness application and its failure to provide suitable temporary accommodation. The errors in the way the Council dealt with Miss X’s homeless application amount to fault. This fault has caused Miss X an injustice.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to remove him from the housing register. We have found no fault in the Council’s decision making and we are satisfied it has already remedied the injustice arising from its delay.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council did not help the complainant when she was facing homelessness in 2019. This is because it is a late complaint.

Summary: Mr X complained that despite assuring him his possessions would be kept safe the Council failed to protect his property when he had to leave his emergency accommodation to travel to a funeral abroad. The Council’s lack of clarity regarding the storage of Mr X’s personal belongings and how he could prevent them being disposed of amounts to fault. This fault has caused Mr X an injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions after Ms X asked for support with her impending homelessness. That is because Ms X applied to the Court to judicially review the Council, therefore this complaint is outside of our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Mr X’s housing application. This is because the Council agreed to review its decision to cancel his housing application and has reinstated it. This action is in line with our Guidance on Remedies and there is nothing further we can achieve.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of Ms X’s Right to Buy applications. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: The Council failed to offer Mrs B suitable temporary accommodation after it accepted it owed her the main housing duty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mrs B, offer suitable temporary accommodation, and take action to prevent similar failings in future.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with Mr X’s application for rehousing. This is because Mr X already has the highest priority for rehousing and further consideration of his complaint would not result in a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delays in progressing his Right to Buy application. This is because it was reasonable to expect Mr X to use the legal remedy available to him under the Right to Buy procedure in the County Court.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council not responding to her complaint about anti-social behaviour by its tenants. This is because the complaint relates to the Council’s management of its social housing and lies outside our legal remit.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about encroachment, damage to his fence and rubbish dumping on to the complainant’s land by the Council’s tenants. This is because it is reasonable to expect the complainant to refer the matter to court to determine his boundary and if he is entitled to damages.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Miss X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of any remaining fault which has caused injustice to Miss X.