Summary: Miss C complained the Council failed to properly assess her housing priority or communicate with her properly about her housing situation. Miss C said this resulted in her living in overcrowded and unsuitable accommodation for longer than necessary and she was no longer able to care for her mother at home. We have found fault in the Council’s complaint handling but consider the apology and payment already offered provides a suitable remedy.

Summary: There was no fault by the Council. The Council reinstated Mr X’s ability to bid on housing once it was told he had made three months of payments towards arrears. The Council explained to Mr X how he could get a refund of the first months storage costs for his possessions but he did not pursue this at the time. The Councils’ communication with Mr X could have been improved but he did not miss any offers of housing and was rehoused once his application was reinstated.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Miss X’s request for housing. The Council properly reached its decision to refuse the housing register application. If Miss X wants accommodation for her child under the Children Act 1989, that is a separate matter she should raise with the Council first.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the way the Council handled his homelessness application in 2006. This is because the complaint is late. There are no good reasons why Mr X could not complain to us sooner.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the way the Council has handled his housing register application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to prune or remove a tree. This is because the decision was made by the Housing Service and we have no power to investigate a council when it is making housing management decisions.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council’s management of the neighbouring property. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about the management of social housing by councils.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to check a property was habitable before placing it on the allocation list for bidding and failed to correct the situation. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: Ms B complained about the Council’s actions and involvement when she rented her house to a homeless family arranged by the Council. She said the Council went back on the agreement and undertakings given when she rented the property. She considered the Council’s actions misled her as to its responsibilities to the family. She said that as a result she was not able to return to the property. She said she suffered considerable distress and disruption. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Ms B. The Council will apologise, make a payment to Ms B and undertake service improvements.

Summary: Ms D complains the Council failed to follow the correct process for a direct offer of housing. We have found evidence of serious and ongoing failings by the Council. We have upheld the complaint and completed the investigation if the Council agrees to pay redress and clarify its procedures.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council has prevented him from accessing the housing register and relied on irrelevant information in its decision making. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for how it communicated with Mr X about his placement, and for failing to explain how it reached its decision. The Council has agreed to pay Mr X a financial remedy, carry out the review, and implement service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council has restricted his ability to bid on properties. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council considered evidence relating to her housing register application. Most of the complaint is late as it relates to evidence Mrs X provided more than 12 months ago. The Council made a new decision in 2023. Mrs X had the right to ask for a review of the decision and it was reasonable for her to have done so. The Council has offered a suitable remedy for the delay in making its decision in 2023.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about delay in the Council responding to a question he asked. He says the Council took five months to respond. He also complains the Council deleted his messages and claimed he never asked the question. This is because the alleged fault has not caused any significant injustice. In addition, there is another body better placed to consider Mr X’s complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of an assessment. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about what happened in court.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has not correctly applied the housing allocation policy. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice and the Council has provided a satisfactory response.

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

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to take action in respect of disrepair at a privately rented property causing distress and affecting her ability to care for her disabled children. The information provided shows the Council took appropriate action to ensure the landlord completed the repairs and so we find no fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s housing application. The Council delayed explaining what it had done, but it remedied that by apologising. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council on other points. Mr X could reasonably have asked for a review of the decision to reduce his priority for housing.

Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council managed her homelessness and temporary accommodation. The Council was at fault for the confusing information it provided to Miss X about the status of her accommodation and for incorrectly removing her from the housing register. The Council will apologise to Miss X and pay her £250 to recognise the avoidable uncertainty caused to her.

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council handled his homelessness and housing register application. The Council was at fault for the way it handled Mr X’s homelessness application. This caused an injustice as Mr X should have received suitable accommodation much sooner. The Council has already accepted there was a delay in completing Mr X’s medical assessment. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X, make a payment to him and carry out some service improvements.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of a homeless application. We will not exercise discretion to consider a complaint about accommodation offered to a homeless applicant in 2021. 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 exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discharge its homelessness duty in 2021. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mrs X could not have complained to us sooner.

Summary: A housing applicant complained about the long time he has been on the Council’s housing list without receiving an offer of accommodation. But we will not start an investigation of this matter as there is no sign of fault by the Council to warrant our involvement.

Summary: Mr R complained, on behalf of Mr C, about the Council’s lack of support when Mr C asked for help with housing. The Council was at fault for a delay in providing interim accommodation, a failure to make proper enquiries before deciding Mr C was not in priority need, a delay in making a fresh decision after the original decision was withdrawn, and a lack of support for Mr C to complete forms and to apply to its housing register. The Council should apologise, pay Mr C £500 for the injustice caused and take steps to prevent the faults recurring.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with a man’s housing case between 2016 and 2022. This is mainly because his complaint has been made late. Also, we could not achieve a more worthwhile result at this stage.

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council reduced his housing priority band as he refused interim accommodation which could not accommodate his dog. The Council is at fault as it did not accept the relief duty when Mr X’s section 21 notice expired and when he disclosed domestic abuse. The Council also did not consider offering interim accommodation which could accommodate his dog. The Council is also at fault as it did not notify Mr X of his right to seek a review of its decision to reduce his housing priority. These faults caused avoidable uncertainty to Mr X and his partner, Ms Y. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice to Mr X and Ms Y by apologising and making a symbolic payment of £300.

Summary: Miss X complained about disrepair issues in the temporary accommodation her mother is currently in, and it is not adapted to assist with her mother’s assessed mobility and disability needs. We found the Council at fault with delays with a suitability review and sending a referral. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

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

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

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint the Council is responsible for damp occurring in her property. That is because Miss X’s complaint is best dealt with through insurance, or the courts.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about accounting related to a residential leasehold. The law prevents us investigating.