Summary: We found no fault by the Council on Ms C’s complaint of it failing to ensure home improvement works were done and affordable. There were some delays in responding to correspondence and contacting the contractor. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Summary: Ms Z complained about the way the Council handled her reports of disrepair and noise. As a result, Ms Z said she has lived in accommodation which is in a very poor state of repair. There was some fault by the Council in how it considered Ms Z’s reports but this did not cause her injustice.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to provide him with suitable accommodation when he became homeless and his removal from the housing register. We found the Council to be at fault. It failed to review its suitability decision when compelling new evidence was provided by the occupational therapy service. It also incorrectly removed Mr X from the housing register. These faults caused Mr X an injustice. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy this.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mrs X’s housing case. She says the Council cancelled an offer of a suitable property without good reason and cancelled her priority award. This is because an investigation would not lead to any further outcomes.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council deciding Miss X is intentionally homeless. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to use the review and appeal process the law provides for such situations.

Summary: Miss Y complained the Council was using an incorrect date to determine her priority on its housing register when bidding for properties. We have found fault by the Council in failing to properly consider the consequence on Miss Y’s priority date, of its review decision overturning the original decision about its housing duty to her. The fault caused injustice. The Council has agreed to remedy this by apologising, backdating Miss Y’s priority date to the date it should have accepted the duty, adding her to its direct offers list, making a payment to reflect the distress caused and a service improvement.

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council refused to include his son in his homeless application. We found the Council was at fault because it provided no contemporaneous documentary evidence of its decision-making and failed to provide Mr X with reasons for its decision. In recognition of the injustice caused the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and make a payment to him.

Summary: Ms X complained that the Council failed to make sure the managing agent of her temporary accommodation provided a satisfactory repairs service. She said there was an unreasonable delay in replacing external doors which were not waterproof resulting in damp and mould and a delay in resolving issues concerning access to the property. We found the agency failed to complete the repairs in accordance with its service level agreement. In recognition of the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and make a payment to her.

Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council handled his housing. He said it impacted his physical and mental health, and caused unnecessary and avoidable distress. We do not find the Council at fault. We have not investigated two parts of Mr X’s complaint because they are outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s lack of action and communication when he reported his landlord failed to address disrepair, mould and damp issues at his privately rented property. We found the Council at fault for letting the case drift, not properly considering Mr X’s concerns and failing to record or explain its decisions to Mr X at the time. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council was at fault in the way it dealt with his need to move from his temporary accommodation after the Council decided it was unsuitable for him and his family’s medical needs causing distress. We found fault because the Council did not provide Mr X with suitable temporary accommodation, and we have made appropriate recommendations. So, we have completed our investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s homelessness decisions. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to have used her review and court appeal rights.

Summary: Miss D complained how the Council has handled her application to be rehoused. She says the Council has unreasonably changed her bedroom need which means she has been unable to bid for suitable properties. We do not find the Council was at fault.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to act on her reports that leaks, mould and damp in her temporary accommodation have made the property unsuitable for her and her family. We found fault by the Council in how it responded to Miss X’s concerns. The Council has agreed to review the suitability of Miss X’s temporary accommodation and apologise to her.

Summary: Ms D says the Council delayed serving an Improvement Notice relating to hazards at her private rental home. We found evidence of fault by the Council and have upheld the complaint and completed the investigation because the Council agrees to pay redress.

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 alleged failure to bid on suitable properties for Miss X. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to result in a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his homeless case. He says the Council has ended its duty and has stopped paying for his accommodation. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to ask the Council to review its decision. Following this, if Mr X is unhappy with the Councils’ review decision, he has the right to appeal to the county court.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to award her the correct housing priority and placed her in unsuitable temporary accommodation. There was no evidence of fault in the way the Council assessed Miss X’s housing priority. The Council failed to consider whether Miss X was requesting a statutory review of the property’s suitability. However, it considered the issues she raised about the property’s suitability through its complaint procedure so this did not cause Miss X a significant injustice. It has agreed to issue a reminder to staff to prevent a recurrence of the fault.

Summary: The Council was at fault for the way it handled Ms X’s housing application as it included historical rent arrears on her account and later removed these. This caused injustice as Ms X does not know whether she could have obtained accommodation if these arrears were not on her account. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X and make a payment to recognise the uncertainty caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a housing register application or its allocations policy. The Council has apologised for any errors in its application handling and agreed to make a new housing decision. That remedies any injustice caused. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s eligibility criteria to justify us investigating.

Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s tenancy termination procedure when Ms X transferred from a council secure tenancy to a housing association assured tenancy in 2017. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Ms X could not have complained to us sooner. We have no jurisdiction to investigate complaints about the management of tenancies by social housing landlords.

Summary: The Council was at fault for not moving Ms X to suitable temporary accommodation sooner. As a result, she spent longer than she should have in unsuitable accommodation. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X, make a payment to acknowledge the time she spent in unsuitable accommodation and look at what it can do to increase its supply of temporary accommodation.

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide a bidding number to allow her to bid for properties following a housing application and sent her other people’s bidding details in error. Miss X also complained the Council failed to respond to her reports of damp and overcrowding. Miss X says this has resulted in her not being able to bid on properties and affected her and her family’s health. We have found fault with the actions of the Council for failing to provide a bidding number and deal with Miss X’s queries concerning this and for failing to investigate Miss X’s reports of damp and overcrowding.

Summary: Miss X complains that the Council failed to accept a homelessness application when she was experiencing domestic abuse from her former partner. The Council is at fault as it failed to accept a homelessness application from Miss X and it delayed in increasing her priority band to band B. Miss X was caused distress and uncertainty by these faults. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice by apologising to Miss X and making a symbolic payment of £300.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about alleged failings by the Council to provide consistent and accurate information about Miss R’s ability to move property and what properties she is eligible for. This is because we are unlikely to find fault with the information provided by the Council. Further, there is no evidence of Miss R having caused a significant enough injustice to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint from a Council tenant about the Council’s failure so far to transfer her from flat, which is in disrepair. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council in the way it has assessed the tenant’s transfer application.