Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her daughter, Miss Y’s housing application. The Council was at fault for an initial delay in processing the application, for which it has apologised. This is a sufficient remedy for the time and trouble caused. There was no fault in the way the Council decided the appropriate priority band.

Summary: Mr B complained about the way the Council responded to his complaints about noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour by the occupier of the house next to his. He said that he and his family are frequently disturbed by shouting and other noise during the night. This disrupts their sleep and is generally distressing. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice and which the Council should remedy by apologising and making a payment to Mr B. It should also consider any further information Mr B provides about the current situation.

Summary: Miss D said the Council was at fault for housing her in unsuitable accommodation and for allowing her possessions to be removed from that accommodation and lost. The Council was at fault for a failure to provide housing for Miss D between September and November 2021 and for allowing her possessions to be disposed of. These faults caused Miss D injustice. She had nowhere to live and lost possessions. The Council has agreed to pay Miss D a sum in recognition of the injustice found.

Summary: We found fault in the way the Council ensured the accommodation offered to the complainant (Ms X) when carrying out its main housing duty was in the right state of repair. This caused Ms X injustice. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X, carry out a joint inspection of her accommodation if there are still any outstanding repairs and make a distress payment for Ms X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s housing application. The Council’s fault has not deprived Mr X of an offer of housing.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council keeps offering unsuitable properties and the complainant is facing eviction. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the complainant could use his review and appeal rights.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response after the complainant sought advice about potential homelessness. 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: A man complained that there had been no heating or hot water supply in his family’s temporary accommodation for six days. But we will not investigate this complaint because the Council has now taken suitable action to deal with the disrepair and the man is satisfied with its response.

Summary: A woman complained that the Council has unreasonably decided it has no duty to house her as she is intentionally homeless. But we will not investigate this matter because the woman has a right of appeal to the county court she can use if she wishes to challenge the Council’s decision. In addition, it is very unlikely we could achieve the outcome she is seeking in that respect.

Summary: Ms B complained the Council failed to act on antisocial behaviour by her neighbour, misled her about the action it intended to take, accused her of lying and failed to properly consider her complaint. The Council failed, on several occasions, to visit Ms B’s property to identify any issues, misled her about the action it would take, failed to always keep her up-to-date with what was happening and failed to investigate part of her concern about her neighbour’s actions properly. I am satisfied the Council took action to deal with Ms B’s concerns about smells and dealt with her complaint properly. An apology, payment to Ms B, reminder to officers and a meeting with Ms B is satisfactory remedy.

Summary: There was no fault in the Council not approving Mr X’s application under the Homes for Ukraine scheme. It had a responsibility to ensure safeguarding and acted in line with guidance. It was at fault in the delays telling Mr X it had not approved his application and allowed Mr X to attend an appointment with the Council unnecessarily and has apologised for the delays. The Council has agreed to offer Mr X a financial remedy to properly recognise the injustice.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council refused to assist her with her housing despite her having been given notice by her mother. The Council was at fault as it offered Miss X access to its rent deposit scheme then refused to assist her and in the way it ended its prevention duty and refused to accept a homelessness application. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X, offer to carry out a statutory review of its decision to end the prevention duty and reconsider whether she can access the rent deposit scheme.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about @.

Summary: Miss F complained the Council failed to deal with a rodent infestation in her property. We found fault which meant Miss F lived in infested accommodation for four months. The Council should apologise and pay Miss F £1,000 to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council wrongly assessed her priority for social housing. There was fault in how the Council decided about Miss X’s housing priority and how it communicated with her. While this did not affect Miss X’s priority, it did cause her avoidable frustration, worry, time and trouble for which the Council agreed to apologise and pay her a financial remedy. The Council also agreed to review how it decides about medical priority.

Summary: Ms X complained about how the Council supported her while she was homeless. There was fault in how the Council arranged suitable, alternative temporary accommodation after it knew Ms X would need to move. This caused Ms X to be without suitable housing for several months and also caused her avoidable distress and worry. The Council agreed to arrange suitable accommodation, apologise to Ms X, and pay her a financial remedy.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council prevented her from accessing her temporary accommodation and belongings. She also complained the Council did not provide her with advice about homelessness and did not provide her with further temporary accommodation. We have discontinued our investigation because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Mr X’s reports of private housing disrepair. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Ms X’s report of a leak in her roof. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s homelessness decision. Miss X could reasonably have used her rights to ask for a Council review and to go to court.

Summary: The Council was not at fault in how it decided not take enforcement action against Mr X’s landlord in January 2022.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to act against the complainant’s neighbour. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The Council is not responsible for resolving private civil disputes between neighbours.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council because Miss X could have used her right to appeal in court.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council was delayed in issuing its decision letter regarding her application for homelessness. We have concluded our investigation having made a finding of fault by the Council. The Council was delayed in issuing its decision to Ms X. Ms X had the Council’s decision overturned and was successfully placed into permanent accommodation shortly after. As a result of the Council’s delays, Ms X remained in temporary accommodation that was not suitable for her. The Council has agreed to the recommendation we proposed.