Jigsaw Homes Group Limited (202110298)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202110298

Jigsaw Homes Midlands

27 February 2023

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a transfer due to accessibility needs.

Background and summary of events

2. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The tenancy commended on 16 May 2018 and the property is a one-bedroom flat on the first floor of a two storey development.
3. The resident has vulnerabilities which the landlord is aware of. It states that at the time of her moving into the property it was aware of the resident’s medical conditions, however at the time she indicated the property was suitable.
4. On 18 March 2019 the local council completed an Occupational Therapy (OT) assessment was conducted. In the report it stated the resident was having difficulties with accessing her flat located on the first floor without a lift, there was no reference to a wheelchair within this report. The report recommends :

1. To be moved to ground floor 1 or 2 bed flat, maximum one or two step entrance or lift access if above ground floor.
2. Bathroom to incorporate surround frame and bathboard and over bath shower.
3. Kitchen to be large enough to accommodate perching stool and service user.

5. Soon after, the landlord undertook agreed works to the property.
6. The resident stated that in April 2020, she informed the landlord that the property was no longer suitable and she had sent the previous OT assessment to the council. However, the landlord stated it did not receive this paperwork.
7. On 4 February 2021, the resident wrote to the landlord stating that a management move had previously been agreed. She said that following the OT report in 2019, a bungalow was recommended, but no action had been taken.
8. Following this, the landlord looked into the resident’s concerns and explained she had been registered with Homesearch since April 2019 and was on a band 2 level. Homesearch is a system which allows residents to bid for other properties in order to move home. It did not have any evidence to support the resident’s claims that she was on the management move list. The landlord also stated that management moves are not granted to deal with medical issues, and her  current address was taken into consideration in the resident’s banding.
9. Throughout May 2021, there were several conversations which took place within the landlord internally and with the resident. This led to the landlord arranging for a fire service assessment to be carried out to consider the suitability of the current property for the resident. This concluded that, based on the resident’s mobility issues, she would need ground floor accommodation. The resident was then added to the management move list.
10. During June 2021, the landlord considered properties for the resident. However, one would not accept her ‘therapy cat’. A viewing of an alternative ground floor property took place on 18 June 2021, however this was declined by the resident on the grounds that it was too far from her support network.
11. As the property was viewed and considered to meet the OT recommendations as set out in the OT report in 2019, and the resident refused the offer, the landlord removed her from the management move list. The landlord stated that, with management moves, it only makes one offer suitable to needs.
12. Following this the resident informed the landlord that the property which she was offered was not suitable to accommodate a wheelchair. The landlord explained that, at the time of viewing, the resident was on foot and it had no previous indications the resident was a wheelchair user. It acknowledged that this property would not have been suitable for a wheelchair user. The landlord requested documentary evidence to confirm that the resident required a wheelchair. During this time the resident had also sought help from her local councillor to represent her, who wrote to the landlord about the resident’s concerns.
13. The landlord wrote to the councillor on 24 June 2021, to explain its current position. It explained that its records noted the resident required a ground floor property with level access shower. A few properties were suitable for her, and it had made an offer to the resident. The landlord recognised that the resident had been interested in a 2 bedroom wheelchair adapted property, however it was agreed by the landlord this was not suitable for the resident, as this type of property was a scarce resource and it would need to let this to someone with an assessed need.
14. On 30 June 2021, the resident wrote to us to express her concerns. She was unhappy that the landlord had removed her from the management move list. She had also been informed that she would need a new OT report/ mobility assessment, however this could take up to three months. She further expressed that she did not want to get rid of her cat as she needed it for therapy. The resident had been told to consider private renting; however this was not an option.
15. As the complaint had not exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure, we redirected the complaint to the landlord.
16. On 23 August 2021, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint. Subsequently it provided a stage one complaint response on 6 September 2021, which acknowledged the resident’s desire to be placed back on the management move list. The landlord explained that, following the outcome of the fire brigade advice to move the resident to ground floor accommodation, it agreed to prioritise the resident’s application and offer her a management move. It stated at the time it had discussed areas that would meet her needs. It also explained that it would make one reasonable offer with this level of priority, directly matching the resident with suitable vacancies without the need for her to bid. Potential offers had also been eliminated due to them being unsuitable for her cat. It explained it showed the resident an alternative property which met her needs. However, following the resident’s refusal of this property, it removed her from the management move list. It confirmed that her Homesearch application was not affected and remained live.
17. The landlord explained that it had no previous record that the resident was a wheelchair user, and requested medical documented evidence for this. On receipt of evidence that she was a wheelchair user, it would reconsider its position.
18. On 17 March 2022, the landlord provided its final review of the resident’s complaint. It reiterated its stance that management moves are only agreed in exceptional circumstances and only one offer is made to prevent preferential treatment over others waiting. The landlord further explained that the offer which it made at the time met the resident’s needs which ‘you had made us aware of up to that point.’ It said that, now she had made it aware that she needed a home suitable for a wheelchair user, it was reasonable to ask for further evidence to support this request before it could review whether its original offer would still be deemed to be reasonable.
19. As the resident remained unhappy, she brought the complaint to us for our adjudication. She explained that she was unhappy with the response for the following reasons:
    1. She did not feel her complaint was taken seriously.
    2. She felt as though she had been abandoned.
    3. She was unhappy about having to get a mobility report.
    4. She was unhappy no one had checked on her, despite the fire brigade saying she is vulnerable.
    5. The property offered was not suitable because of the steps and doorway not being wide enough to accommodate a wheelchair and a walker.
    6. She would like the landlord to offer her something more suitable.

Assessment and findings

20. . We have no legal power to determine a complaint about a housing transfer application which is managed by a local authority, as such complaints fall within the jurisdiction of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.
21. The landlord’s transfers are normally made via a local authority common choice based letting scheme called Homesearch or via Mutual Exchanges. However, an exception to this is “Managed Moves” which are directly managed by the landlord to address emergency rehousing situations for its residents.
22. The landlord has an obligation to handle housing transfers and allocations, including management moves, in accordance with its policies, which ensures all residents are treated fairly and consistently.
23. When the resident informed the landlord that she wished to be considered for a management move, it explained that it did not generally consider management moves on the grounds of medical conditions. However, following a report from the fire service explaining that the property was unsuitable, and the resident was vulnerable, the resident was added to the management move list.
24. We have reviewed the landlord’s management move procedure. It states that management moves are considered in order to allow a move to happen quickly. It explains that, in most situations support with priority banding is appropriate, however where no other housing solution is possible, a management move would be considered. The criteria states that management moves are only considered in cases where there are:-
    1. Exceptional circumstances where there is imminent risk to health and safety (e.g. Life at Risk / Domestic Violence cases / Cuckooing / Safeguarding).
    2. Extreme financial hardship (e.g. Urgent downsizing moves).
    3. Urgent medical/welfare need (e.g. cases awaiting hospital discharge where their current property is not suitable).
    4. Urgent decant cases (Disrepair/Local emergency due to Fire, Flood, Explosion).
    5. Local Authority crisis referrals (Covid-19).
25. The procedure explains that one reasonable offer will be made that matches the criteria agreed on the referral. Should the landlord be unable to meet this criteria, consideration will be given to increasing the search parameters.
26. It was reasonable for the landlord to add the resident to the management list following the fire service’s advice. Whilst the 2019 OT assessment recommended the resident be moved to a ground floor accommodation, the basis of this recommendation alone did not meet management move list criteria.
27. The landlord  found a suitable alternative property for the resident based on her needs as it was aware of them at the time, however she was unhappy with the property due to its location and not being close to her support network.
28. We understand how important a support network is, however the landlord’s offer was in line with its management move policy.  Therefore, when the landlord considered the resident’s reasons for rejecting the alternative property and decided to remove her from its management move list, it was within its guidelines to do so, as it had made one reasonable offer to the resident based on the information available to it at that point.
29. Soon after, the resident explained that the property was not suitable as it would have not accommodated a wheelchair. The evidence shows that the landlord had noted this property would not be suitable for a wheelchair user, however it had no record to support the resident’s claims that she needed a wheelchair. Subsequently it asked her to provide evidence of this, and said it would then reconsider adding her to the management move list.
30. The resident explained she had mobility issues and that she needed to use a wheelchair. However the key consideration for the Ombudsman is whether there is any evidence that the landlord was aware of this before it made the offer of accommodation to her. This is because, if it had known, that would have meant the offer was not reasonable. In this case however there is no evidence that the landlord was aware of the resident’s need for a wheelchair before she told it in 2021. Therefore the offer made, based on the circumstances known to it at the time, was fair and reasonable.
31. The alternative properties considered did not allow pets, however the resident has a therapy pet, so therefore she felt the properties were unsuitable. We understand how frustrating this must be for the resident, and how pets play an essential role in people’s lives. However, we also recognise that landlords generally have limited resources and cannot always meet all the preferences of residents. It Is important to note that landlords will be managing other applicants in similar or worse circumstances, who are generally required to seek alternative accommodation through  Homesearch or mutual exchange. It is therefore considered reasonable for the landlord to recommend these options, as it would maximise the resident’s chances of finding a suitable property. Overall, this service is of the view that the landlord’s actions have been fair and reasonable.
32. This service recognises that the current property has been noted as not suitable for the resident. We understand the landlord had previously requested for the resident to get an up-to-date OT assessment and mobility assessment for the resident. Once this has been received, the landlord should discuss options further with the resident.

Determination (decision)

33. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a transfer due to accessibility needs.

Reasons

34. The landlord was proactive in attempting to help the resident move property. Its decision to offer a management move in the light of the fire brigade advice was appropriate. Its offer was reasonable at the time, based on the information available to it. When it was made aware by the resident that she required a wheelchair accessible property, it confirmed that it would reconsider its position on a management move on receipt of supporting evidence.

Orders and recommendations

Recommendations

35. If it has not done so already, following receipt of an updated OT assessment/ mobility assessment from the resident, the landlord should discuss housing options further with her.