Summary
Mr C's daughter (Miss A) has a severe form of autism (a developmental disability that affects how a person communicates with, and relates to, other people) and significant learning disabilities. The council recognised that her current tenancy did not meet her needs, and awarded her additional housing points. They did not, however, offer her the tenancy of a vacant property that Mr C had thought suitable for her. The council said that they had in fact assessed the property to see if it met Miss A's needs, and decided that it would not do so long-term. Mr C complained that this decision was based on false information and that the council had offered no solution to Miss A's housing difficulties.
Our investigation looked at the council's housing allocations policy, records of Miss A's needs and housing assessments, internal council correspondence about her housing allocation, and social work case notes. We also asked for more information about the assessment. We found that the council had followed their procedures properly, and that a social worker and a senior occupational therapy practitioner had assessed the property. They had decided that although it would meet Miss A's needs in some ways, overall it was unsuitable and they could not recommend it for her. This was a decision for them to take and as we found they had gone about it properly, we could not question it.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201305529 as a PDF (11.26 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018