Summary: Miss X complained the Council’s housing team: delayed in dealing with her homelessness application and wrongly treated her as a domestic abuse victim; provided unsuitable emergency accommodation outside its area between September and December 2021; provided unsuitable alternative temporary accommodation in Council B’s area from December 2021 onwards; and following a complaint, identified an alternative temporary property for the family in November 2022 but had not given them a date to move there. Miss X complained the Council’s education and children’s services: delayed in transferring her son, Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan to Council B after the family moved to temporary accommodation there; and failed to provide assistance with home to school transport for Y.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to move her and her family into suitable temporary accommodation after its review agreed her accommodation was unsuitable. We found fault because Miss X remained in unsuitable accommodation for a significant amount of time. To remedy the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Miss X.

Summary: When Miss B was living in a homeless centre, the Council failed to deal with her request to be moved to suitable accommodation and failed to properly follow its procedures for dealing with disputes between residents. It then failed to carry out a review of the suitability of the accommodation it subsequently offered to Miss B. The Council has agreed to make a payment to Miss B and to offer her suitable temporary accommodation. It has also agreed to make service improvements.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to provide reasonable adjustments and failed to find him suitable accommodation which reflected his needs as an Autistic person. He also complained about the Council’s communication over several issues and delay in dealing with his complaint. We found the Council mostly considered making reasonable adjustments to reflect Mr X’s Autism. However, Mr X has not been housed in suitable accommodation, which we found was service failure. We found some fault in communication and there had been delay in responding to Mr X’s complaint. We recommended action be taken and a payment to reflect the accommodation issue.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his homelessness application and that it discriminated against him due to his disability. Mr X says the Council’s actions resulted in him sleeping rough which had a negative impact on his mental and physical health. We found no fault in the Council’s offer of interim accommodation but some fault in the Council’s record keeping and advice to Mr X. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and provide a financial remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms C’s belongings and her homelessness. This is mainly because the complaint is late without good enough reason to investigate it now and it is unlikely any investigation could reach a clear enough view now.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled Ms X’s homelessness application. This is because we could not add anything to the investigation already carried out by the Council and the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider a complaint about a breach of data protection regulations.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay repairing noisy pipes at one of its properties. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about the management of social housing by councils.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the suitability of temporary accommodation because Mrs X had review and appeal rights that it was reasonable for her to use.

Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council handled his homelessness application and his complaint. Mr X said there has been a significant impact on his physical and mental health from being street homeless. He is constantly at risk. He said this has caused unnecessary and avoidable distress, frustration, and uncertainty. We find the Council at fault, and this caused Mr X injustice. The Council will apologise, make a payment to Mr X, and improve its service.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s housing application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the replacement of a boundary fence. The ownership of the fence has not been determined and we cannot investigate complaints about private boundary issues. Once the ownership is determined the complainant may be able to seek a remedy in the courts if the fence was in their ownership.

Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council has handled her homelessness application. She also complains about the Councils lack of communication and contradictory information. We find the Council was at fault for delay in progressing the case and delay in considering whether Miss X was in rent arrears. This caused significant distress to Miss X. To address this injustice caused by fault the Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has managed bids on the housing register. This is because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delays in handing back a leased property to the landlord under a private lease agreement. It is reasonable for Mr X to seek a remedy in the courts for any breaches of the contract terms.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application. We found fault by the Council causing distress and uncertainty to Mrs X. The Council has agreed to provide an apology and a financial remedy to Mrs X.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to discharge its duty to secure suitable accommodation for him, and to evict him from his temporary accommodation. This is because it was reasonable for him to have appealed to Court following the Council’s review decision.