Summary: Mrs B says the Council delayed completing a homeless assessment, failed to follow through with appointments in her personal housing plan, gave her an incorrect banding on the housing register, failed to ensure her landlord addressed issues of mould in the property and delayed providing her with three-bedroom accommodation. The Council failed to carry out appointments in the personal housing plan and delayed providing Mrs B with temporary accommodation. A payment to Mrs B is satisfactory remedy. There is no evidence of fault in the remainder of the complaint.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not properly consider his housing application. We discontinued our investigation. That is because the situation moved on. The Council took a new homelessness application for Mr X and awarded him its highest housing priority. The Ombudsman could not achieve more.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assistance with accommodation in response to Miss X’s homeless application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation. It was reasonable for her to seek a review or appeal to the County Court about suitability of homeless accommodation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered Mr X’s application to host a Ukrainian Refugee and its response to his subsequent concerns. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Miss X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: Mr D complained the Council has failed to take action to deal with the issues in his accommodation. He also says the Council has failed to deal with his complaints about the matter. We find the Council was at fault for failing to appropriately deal with Mr D’s complaints. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not allowing Miss X to have the support she needed to decide whether to accept a property offered by the Council and for failing to consider her mental health needs when considering her review request. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, it is reasonable for Miss X to ask the Council for a new review.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Miss X’s housing application. The Council reached its decision properly.

Summary: A woman complained about the Council’s decision that she had no priority need as a homeless person and, as a result, would have to leave the accommodation it had provided for her. But we will not investigate this matter because the Council has now reversed its decision and we could not achieve a better outcome than that.

Summary: There was delay and confusing information given to Miss X when she needed to organise an Occupational Health assessment. An apology and payment remedies the injustice caused. There is no evidence the Council was aware the property was unsuitable when it was allocated to Miss X or that it should have moved her to temporary accommodation while she waited for a suitable property to become available.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of matters relating to the ending of Mr X’s tenant’s tenancy. This is because an investigation is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We cannot investigate this housing complaint because the complainant has applied to the court for a Judicial Review.

Summary: The Council failed to provide Miss B and her children with suitable accommodation when they were homeless. There were also failings in the way it carried out reviews of the suitability of the accommodation. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Miss B. It will also take action to prevent similar failings in future.

Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council dealt with the re‑assessments of her housing applications. She also complained about disrepairs in her property. The Council was at fault for the delays in re-assessing Miss X’s housing application. It was also at fault for further delays in applying her revised priority award to her housing register account and delays with paying her compensation for its failings. This has caused Miss X and her family injustice. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s alleged failure to properly advise Mrs X about her housing situation. This is because we would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about Miss X not being assigned her parents’ tenancy after her parents moved. This is because we have no remit to consider complaints about the Council’s actions when it is acting as a social housing landlord.

Summary: Miss X complains she has had to deal with constant disrepair in her temporary accommodation. We find fault with the Council for failing to carry out repairs and deal with the various infestations in a timely manner. We have agreed a financial remedy for Miss X for the inconvenience and distress caused.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not award enough points for overcrowding on her housing register application. The Council awarded points in line with its housing allocation scheme. However the Council was at fault for the delay in issuing its review decision and for not explaining the information it relied on when it made that decision. The Council will apologise to Mrs X for the frustration caused and review its process.

Summary: The Council’s failure to provide Miss X with interim accommodation, issue written decisions with review rights on her homeless application and her application to the housing register, and delay responding to her complaints were fault. Miss X was at risk of domestic abuse and the Council’s fault caused her avoidable frustration and distress. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X, and act to improve its services.

Summary: The Council delayed assessing Miss B’s housing application and then delayed reviewing its housing priority decision. The delays resulted in Miss B being given a later award date. The Council has agreed to apologise for the delays, backdate Miss B’s award date and take action to prevent similar failings in future.

Summary: There was no fault by the Council. The Council’s panel considered the housing register application and made a decision on the banding and bedroom requirement aware of all the relevant facts. There is no evidence of fault in the decision making process.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about disrepair of a balcony light at the complainants flat. There is not enough significant injustice to justify our involvement.

Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about the information provided by the Council about her move from a council property to a new development owned and operated by a housing association. This is because her complaint about the Council concerns its actions in connection with the provision/management of social housing, which the law prohibits us from investigating, and the housing association is not a body within our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a comment a Council officer allegedly made to the complainant. This is because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response and we cannot achieve part of the outcome the complainant would like to achieve.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Miss X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the suitability of temporary accommodation offered to Miss X. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse Miss X housing after assessing her homelessness application. It was reasonable for Miss X to exercise her right to have the matter considered by the county court.