Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Mr X when he was homeless. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify an investigation.

Summary: Ms D says the Council failed to correctly assess her housing application. We have found fault by the Council including a lengthy period of delay. We uphold the complaint and complete the investigation The Council has agreed to the recommended actions which includes financial redress for the lost opportunity to move to a suitable new home.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council delayed a referral to Occupational Therapy, which meant he could not bid on eligible properties. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for how it communicated with Mr X about the referral. The Council has agreed to make a financial payment for uncertainty and distress caused.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to carry out proper checks and misrepresented information about a prospective tenant introduced to him under its private landlord scheme. We have found fault by the Council in failing to carry out, or properly carry out all the checks it said it would complete, and to be open and transparent about this and the information it had obtained, causing injustice. The Council has agreed to remedy this by apologising to Mr X, making a payment to reflect the worry and uncertainty caused and a service improvement.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about changes to the layout of a car park at the complainants housing association property. This is because the Housing Ombudsman is better placed to consider the issues raised.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s waiting time to be re-housed. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we could not achieve the outcome the complainant wants.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Miss X’s temporary accommodation. It is reasonable for Miss X to seek a suitability review then, if necessary, go to court about the property’s suitability. The personal injury claim is more properly for the courts. It would be disproportionate to investigate an alleged discriminatory comment in isolation.

Summary: There was fault in how the Council dealt with Miss X’s application to the housing register and her homeless applications. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X and act to improve its services.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council ended its housing duty because the complainant refused its offer of suitable housing. This is because the complainant has statutory review and appeal rights which he can use to challenge the Council’s decision.

Summary: The Council delayed assessing Mr B’s housing application and evidence which showed that he needed an adapted property to suit his mobility needs. The Council has agreed to offer Mr B the next suitable property he bids on. It has also agreed to make a payment to Mr B and to take action to prevent similar failings in future.

Summary: Mr V complains the Council has not given his medical need to move home enough priority and has also not decided his homeless application. The Ombudsman upholds the complaint because of the delay in the homelessness decision. The Council’s proposed remedy is suitable to remedy the injustice to Mr V.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s responses to Ms X’s complaints about council repairs and her claim for loss of rental income. This is because we have no remit to consider any matters in connection with the Council’s actions as a manager of housing let on a long lease.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about scaffolding erected at a neighbouring property by the Council. This is because we have no remit to investigate complaints in connection with the Council’s role as a landlord of social housing.

Summary: The Council failed to provide Miss B’s household with suitable accommodation when they were homeless. It also failed to tell Miss B that she had the right to request a review of the suitability of the accommodation. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss B and take action to prevent similar failings in future.

Summary: Miss C complained how the Council has handled her rent arrears for her temporary accommodation. She says the Council failed to tell her about her rent arrears and its communication with her has been poor. We cannot investigate Miss C’s substantive concerns about the rent arrears due to the lack of records from the Council after it was a victim of a cyber-attack. However, this is a service failure, which has caused Miss C an injustice. The Council was also at fault for its communication with Miss C. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address Miss C’s injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint as it is fundamentally about homelessness decisions on which Miss X could reasonably have used her review and appeal rights

Summary: We will use our general discretion not to investigate this complaint about what happened when the complainant used a community food larder.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council has failed to take appropriate and timely action in relation to plumbing issues at their privately rented property. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council investigated the plumbing issues at Mr X’s property. But the delays in carrying out a building inspection and in responding to Mr X’s complaints are fault. This fault has caused Mr X an injustice for which the Council has offered an appropriate remedy.