The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: The Council was not at fault for saying it would only offer a like for like two bedroom property as part of a management transfer. It was at fault for failing to move Miss X and her family through a management transfer after deciding her current property was unsuitable. It was also at fault for not discussing Miss X’s housing and medical needs with her as agreed in the stage one complaint response. In addition, the Council was at fault for a five-month delay in issuing the decision letter. The Council has agreed to pay Miss X a financial remedy to remedy the injustice caused.
The complaint
Miss X complained the Council: Failed to move her after deciding her current property was unsuitable; and Delayed issuing her with the decision letter about this.
Miss X says her housing needs have gone unmet for longer than necessary and this has caused her distress, frustration and uncertainty.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)
What I have and have not investigated We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended).
Some of Miss X’s complaint is late. Miss X had a management transfer to a new property in July 2022 and complained at the time the property was not suitable. The Council issued a final complaint response in November 2022 not upholding the complaint but she did not come to us until July 2025.
Miss X made a further complaint about the same issue in January 2025. In February 2025, the Council said it would not usually look at the same complaint again but it found that it did not consider the suitability of the property at the time.
It was open to Miss X to complain to us earlier about the events in 2022 and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate from this point. Therefore, I have investigated from January 2025 when Miss X made the second complaint.
The end point of an investigation is usually the date the complainant brings their complaint us, in this case 7 July 2025. The end point of my investigation is 7 August 2025 which was when the Council issued Miss X with the letter agreeing to a second management transfer. I have exercised discretion to investigate to this point as the Council made this decision and communicated this to Miss X in March 2025. However, it did not send her the letter with her review rights until August.
How I considered this complaint
I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
What I found
Relevant law and guidance Housing allocations Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14)) An allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants in the following categories: homeless people; people in insanitary, overcrowded or unsatisfactory housing; people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds; people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others; (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(3)) Managed transfers Enfield Council tenants may be considered for an Exceptional or Emergency Transfer known internally as ‘Management Transfers’ in the following circumstances: Child abuse from within the family or within the neighbourhood Threat of violence or actual violence Rape or assault within the home or immediate locality Unnatural death (suicide or murder within the home) Irretrievable breakdown in the relationship with neighbours Threat of or actual gang violence where this is confirmed after a full investigation with police reports and all available legal remedies have been exhausted Where the tenant’s circumstances put either their own or other people’s lives or health at risk (for instance living in a high-rise block but being unable to manage stairs in an emergency) The Head of Housing Services or the Principal Housing Neighbourhood Manager will consider urgent moves in these circumstances. They will base their decision on an investigation undertaken by housing management staff to gather evidence of the reason for needing to move urgently and any health and well-being assessment available.
The Council will usually make one offer of a similar type of home to that currently occupied to applicants approved for a transfer for an exceptional or emergency reason unless moving from the type of accommodation is the reason for the move. For example, a tenant who is living in a high-rise flat will be offered an alternative high-rise flat. The senior officer agreeing the move should use their discretion to alleviate severe overcrowding at the same time.
Background
Miss X and her children lived in a two-bedroom rented property but had to leave due to domestic abuse. In July 2022, the Council offered her a management transfer to another two-bedroom property which she accepted. However, the kitchen and bathroom were substantially smaller and could not accommodate the equipment for Miss X’s and her child’s disabilities.
In August 2022, Miss X complained the Council mismanaged the transfer and did not consider the medical needs of her family. In November 2022, the Council issued a stage two complaint response not upholding the complaint.
Miss X also applied to join the housing register and she received the outcome of the housing assessment in January 2023. The Council assessed Miss X as needing a three-bed property due to overcrowding. Miss X was lacking one bedroom.
What happened In January 2025, Miss X complained again about the handling of the management transfer in 2022 and that the medical needs of her family were not considered.
The Council issued a stage one complaint response in February 2025 saying the following: It would not usually look at the same complaint again but having reviewed Miss X’s original complaint there are grounds for considering this again and it has found that it did not consider the suitability of the property at the time the offer was made; and To remedy this, it has arranged for Miss X’s case to be reviewed by a Housing Exceptions Panel to consider the suitability of her current accommodation and the possibility of a management transfer. It said a housing officer would be in contact with Miss X to discuss her medical and housing needs to prepare a case to take to the Housing Exceptions Panel.
Mrs X sent multiple emails asking when an officer would be in contact to discuss her housing and medical needs prior to the panel. However, Miss X’s case went to panel without this happening.
In March, the panel agreed to a management transfer to another two-bed property. This was because the current property’s bathroom and kitchen were too small to accommodate Miss X’s and her child’s mobility needs. The panel agreed to a ‘like for like’ property with an appropriately sized kitchen and bathroom. This decision was communicated informally to Miss X.
Upon receiving the decision, Miss X escalated her complaint to stage two as she said they need an extra bedroom for her child’s medical needs. She submitted further medical information to the Council in support of this. Miss X queried why she could not submit medical information before the case went to panel as agreed in the stage one complaint response.
In July 2025, the Council emailed Miss X asking her to provide a consent form signed by her child so it could obtain further medical information. It also requested two months bank statements from Miss X. Miss X said she has provided medical consent but not the bank statements.
The Council issued a final stage complaint response the same month saying the following: It was currently awaiting the outcome of the medical assessment for her child, and it anticipated this would be completed by September. A medical assessment officer will review this to ensure that the property offered meets their needs; The property offered via the management transfer will be on a ‘like for like’ basis so an alternative two-bedroom property; and It acknowledged her concerns regarding unanswered emails. It apologised for any delay or lack of response. It said it was reviewing internal communication logs to ensure all correspondence is accounted for.
The letter explained a management transfer was not designed to improve a household’s housing position but to resolve specific risk of hardship. It explained if medical points were awarded on the housing allocations scheme Miss X may wish to return to bidding for accommodation.
Miss X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s handling of the matter and complained to us. Miss X says as the Council had not discussed her medical and housing needs with her prior to taking the case to panel, the panel had been unable to exercise discretion to award additional bedrooms.
On 7 August 2025, the Council issued Miss X with a formal letter telling her the panel outcome from March 2025. It said Miss X had 28 days to request a review of the decision.
Miss X requested a review of this decision and provided supporting evidence a few days later. The Council notified Miss X it would not carry out a review of the decision until it received the outcome of the medical assessment.
Council’s response to our enquiries The Council said whilst it failed to issue the decision letter immediately, Miss X was made aware of the outcome after the panel meeting. It said it accepted it failed to follow process and apologises to Miss X for the oversight. The Council has provided evidence it has sent multiple reminders to its officers to ensure outcome letters are issued.
The Council said it will continue to work with Miss X to resolve her housing issues and she has already been approved for a management transfer on a ‘like for like’ basis. Given that there are some areas of the borough she cannot return to due to domestic abuse and limited housing stock, the Council said this is likely to take some time.
The Council said it does have discretion to award an extra bedroom for severe overcrowding but would not consider one bedroom lacking to be severe. There are currently over 600 applicants on the housing register that have applied due to lacking one bedroom. Therefore, the panel will normally use discretion to award an extra bedroom for a management transfer where there is severe overcrowding (lacking two or more bedrooms), and an offer will be made to resolve the overcrowding at the same time.
The Council has said that it has been unable to determine what a suitable housing offer for rehousing should be because to date she has not provided the correct consent form despite it requesting this on multiple occasions or the two months of bank statements. The Council said Miss X did complete a consent form in September 2025 but this was not the Council’s consent form and it was not signed by her child.
My findings
The role of the of the housing panel was to consider a management transfer for Miss X on safety reasons. The policy is clear that a management transfer is not designed to improve a household’s housing position but to resolve a specified risk. The Council was not at fault for saying it would only offer a like for like two bedroom property as part of a management transfer.
The Council was at fault for not discussing with Miss X her housing and medical needs prior to the housing panel, as agreed in its stage one complaint response. However, this did not cause Miss X a significant injustice. Had the Council held a discussion with Miss X beforehand, it would not have changed the outcome as it would only offer a ‘like for like’ two bedroom property as part of the management transfer.
Miss X has submitted medical information to the Council and since her complaint to us it has requested further information related to this. The Council said as Miss X has not provided the further information, it cannot determine whether there is a medical need for a larger property. It is open to Miss X to provide this so the Council can assess whether she should receive additional medical priority which would increase her likelihood of securing a larger property.
In March 2025, the Council’s housing panel decided Miss X needed a management transfer to another property as the current property’s bathroom and kitchen were too small to accommodate Miss X’s and her child’s mobility needs. Despite this, the Council had not offered Miss X a new suitable property by the end point of my investigation. Although there is no statutory timescale for a management transfer, the delay is excessive and there is no indication it took the appropriate steps to identify an alternative property. This was fault. As a result, Miss X remained in an unsuitable property.
Whilst the Council decided Miss X’s property was unsuitable, it did not issue a formal letter with review rights until August 2025. This was also fault which meant Miss X could not request a review until five months after the Council made its decision.
If Miss X is unhappy with the Council’s review outcome or the delay in the Council completing the medical assessment, she will have to make a new complaint to the Council as it is past the end point of our investigation. If she remains dissatisfied with its complaint response, Miss X can bring the matter back to us.
Action
Within one month of the final decision, the Council has agreed to: Apologise to Miss X for the injustice caused by the faults identified in this decision. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
Pay Miss X £640 which equates to £150 per month between March 2025-August 2025. This is for each month Miss X and her family spent in unsuitable accommodation.
Within three months of the final decision, the Council has agreed to create an action plan demonstrating the action it is taking to reduce delays in allocating housing in management transfer cases where it has accepted the current property is unsuitable.
The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.
Decision I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman