Summary: There was fault by the Council. There was a delay in accepting the main housing duty and in offering Mrs X temporary accommodation. A payment for the extra time in unsuitable accommodation and service improvements remedy the injustice caused. There was also a failure to document the reasons that interim accommodation was suitable, which did not cause injustice to Mrs X.

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council decided it would not offer him accommodation while he was homeless. The Council took too long to act when it owed Mr X the relief duty and too long to decide whether to offer Mr X interim accommodation. This caused Mr X frustration and uncertainty for which the Council will apologise.

Summary: Ms B complained about how the Council dealt with her housing application and medical assessment. We found fault with the Council’s actions which caused injustice to Ms B. The Council will apologise to Ms B, make a payment to her, offer her a new medical assessment and remind housing staff of the importance of properly explaining decisions in letters.

Summary: Miss B complained that the Council failed to take prompt or effective action to ensure disrepair in her privately rented property was resolved. We have not found fault with the actions of the Council and consider some of the events are too old to consider now.

Summary: There was fault by the Council. There has been delay in carrying out a review of Mr X’s housing application banding. There was also delay in dealing with Mr X’s homelessness application and an incorrect sentence in a decision notice. Carrying out the review remedies the injustice to Mr X, along with an apology and a payment.

Summary: Miss B complained that the Council had failed to find her and her family suitable temporary accommodation since February 2023 when it concluded her current accommodation was unsuitable for her needs. We found fault with Council’s actions. The Council has agreed to pay her £500, review with Miss B the type of accommodation which could be suitable and find her alternative accommodation within three months.

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

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint against Sutton Council to end its housing duty and provide the complainant with accommodation. This is because the issues subject to his complaint have been, and are currently, subject to legal proceedings in court. He will also have a further right of appeal in County Court on the conclusion of these proceedings.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to award Mr X medical priority on its housing register. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to remove an application from the housing transfer register. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council placed her family in unsuitable accommodation and delayed addressing her complaint. We find fault which caused Ms X avoidable inconvenience, distress and frustration. The Council should apologise and make symbolic payments to Ms X to reflect the injustice caused.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness case after it accepted the relief and main housing duty in 2022. The Council was at fault. It failed to offer suitable interim or temporary accommodation despite being aware Mrs X was living in an overcrowded unsuitable property. It meant Mrs X stayed in an unsuitable property for 18 months longer than necessary. The Council agreed to make a payment to recognise the distress this caused and carry out service improvements.

Summary: Miss D complained about the Council’s handling of her homeless application which meant she lived in unsuitable accommodation. She said, as a result, she experienced distress and uncertainty. The Council accepted it was at fault as it had a duty to provide Miss D with interim accommodation from February to December 2023. We found it also failed to issue its housing decisions giving her appeal rights, communicated poorly, and failed to respond to her complaint. The Council agreed to apologise to Miss D and make payment to remedy the injustice its faults caused.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that he is not in priority need and its refusal to provide him with temporary accommodation. This is because he had the right to appeal the Council’s decision and it was reasonable for him to have appealed. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault.

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

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about disrepair in a social rented property. We have no jurisdiction not investigate complaints about the management of tenancies by social housing landlords. There is no evidence that the Council has failed to process a housing application by Miss X.

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

Summary: Ms X complains that the Council has failed to provide suitable temporary accommodation to her and her family. The Council is at fault as it has failed to provide alternative suitable temporary accommodation for Ms X and her family. As a result, Ms X and her children have lived in unsuitable temporary accommodation for 26 months and this injustice is ongoing. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice by apologising to Ms X and making a payment of £3900 to her. The Council will also make a payment of £150 per month to Ms X for every month she remains in unsuitable temporary accommodation.

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to promptly make decisions and communicate with her properly when she was homeless due to fleeing domestic abuse. Ms X also complained the Council failed to provide her with interim accommodation. The Council was at fault. These faults have caused Ms X distress, frustration and uncertainty regarding whether she could have accessed accommodation sooner than she did. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Ms X £700 and carry out service improvements.

Summary: Mr X complained about his housing allocations priority banding and priority date. We did not find fault in the Council’s consideration of Mr X’s housing priority. The Council considered Mr X’s evidence and made its decision about his priority banding and date in line with its allocations scheme.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council has not provided a sufficient remedy following delay in repairing faulty appliances in his temporary accommodation. We have concluded our investigation having made a finding of fault. There was delay in repairing the appliances and the Council has offered to make a further remedy payment to Mr X in line with its Housing Compensation Policy. The Council’s offer is fair and proportionate.

Summary: We have ended our investigation. The Council accepts it is at fault in that it housed households with dependent children or a pregnant woman in bed and breakfast accommodation longer than the six weeks allowed by law, causing them an injustice. It has already taken appropriate action to address the fault. There are no further recommendations the Ombudsman would make if we were to investigate this issue further.

Summary: Mr B says the Council failed to process his housing register and homeless applications. There is no fault in how the Council dealt with Mr B’s applications.

Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council handled his homelessness application and referral to another Council. There was some fault by the Council as it did not offer Mr X interim accommodation for one night, causing Mr X to pay for his own accommodation. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X and make a payment for the distress caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about management of leases and tenancies in a building where the Council has landlord responsibility. Mr X could complain to the Housing Ombudsman Service about the deficiencies of flooring and bathroom leaks from the property above in a leasehold building.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s property offer and its referral of his homelessness application to another council. Part of the complaint is late and Mr X has a right of review about the recent homelessness decision that it would be reasonable for him to use.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse to allow her to join its housing register. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s implementation of government guidance for rough sleepers during severe weather. There is insufficient evidence of any significant personal injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to renew its lease on his property and damage caused by a previous tenant. We could not add to the Council’s investigation or achieve anything more. If Mr X believes the Council liable for the damage caused by the tenant, it is reasonable for him to take the Council to court.

Summary: Miss X complains the Council placed her in unsuitable accommodation and delayed carrying out a suitability review. Miss X says this meant her and her child were kept in unsuitable accommodation. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for failing to secure suitable accommodation and for delaying Miss X’s assessment and homelessness decision. The Council has agreed to pay Miss X a financial remedy.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of alleged anti-social behaviour by its social housing tenants. This is because the Housing Ombudsman deals with these types of complaints and we have no legal jurisdiction to investigate.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to pay her legal costs related to court action between her and a private tenant. Part of the complaint is late, there is not enough evidence of fault and we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X wants.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s management of a lease on his property. This is because it is reasonable for Mr X to take the matter to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s investigation of disrepair in a private rented tenancy. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s housing application. This is because the Council accepted fault and offered a suitable remedy. Further investigation would not be proportionate.