Council to implement action plan addressing backlog of “several hundreds” of medical priority reviews after Ombudsman finds fault in housing priority case

Camden Council has agreed to produce an action plan to address a large backlog of medical priority assessments and reviews, following an investigation by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.

During the course of the Ombudsman’s investigation, the local authority confirmed it still had several hundred reviews which were overdue.

In its report, the Ombudsman had noted similar backlogs in decisions it made in early 2024 “and the council has provided no evidence of significant progress in that time”.

The Ombudsman said the action plan should set out time-limited targets for how the council will reduce the backlogs and include arrangements for the plan to be monitored by a suitably senior council officer.

The LGSCO’s investigation was prompted by a complaint by a resident (Miss X) about delays in how Camden assessed her priority for social housing.

The Ombudsman concluded that there was fault in how long the London borough took to assess Miss X’s medical priority and review its decision and in how it then communicated.

In addition to production of the action plan to address overdue reviews, the council has agreed to apologise and pay Miss X a financial remedy of £450 in recognition of the distress caused.

Miss X had complained about how the council decided on her priority for social housing in 2023 and 2024.

The complaint was made up of five grievances, with the resident claiming that Camden:

1. took too long to decide her request for medical priority;
2. failed to send her a written decision about this;
3. had not given her points she was entitled to for the length of time she had been on the waiting list;
4. had still not completed the second stage review she asked for in May 2024; and
5. communicated poorly with her throughout that time.

As a result, Miss X argued that she did not have the right priority, could not properly prepare her request for a stage two review, could not bid on properties for around six months and was caused significant avoidable frustration and uncertainty.

Miss X had applied to the council’s housing register several years ago and was awarded points for living in overcrowded conditions.

In late 2022, she submitted a medical information form requesting medical priority, which the council received. However, it refused her application.

Miss X asked for a review in mid-March, and in May 2023, the council asked her to complete an updated medical questionnaire, which she returned in June.

Although Camden sought further medical advice in October 2023, it did not inform Miss X of its decision until February 2024, despite her chasing them multiple times, the Ombudsman said.

After the council still failed to provide reasons for its decision, Miss X complained and repeated her request for the reasons so she could prepare her stage 2 review request.

The council upheld her complaint but once again failed to provide its reasoning.

Miss X complained to the Ombudsman in June 2024 due to the ongoing failure to receive a proper explanation.

The council finally sent its written reasons in September 2024, although the letter was dated July.

The Ombudsman found fault with all three rounds of delays, as well as finding that total delays of around 16 months caused Miss X “significant and prolonged distress, frustration and worry.”

Additionally, the Ombudsman described Camden’s communication with Miss X during her request for medical assessment and the review process as “very poor”.

With the resident having chased the council several times during the period, with each failing to achieve a response, the Ombudsman found that the lack of communication was also fault.

Camden had delayed responding to Miss X’s complaints, failed to explain those delays, and repeatedly neglected to provide the written reasons she requested, the Ombudsman said.

Poor communication and failure to address her main concerns had caused avoidable frustration, and the Ombudsman believed that the £110 compensation offered to Miss X was inadequate.

However, the Ombudsman found that while Miss X was prevented from bidding on properties during the delay, the fact that she did not have the correct medical priority made it unlikely that she would have been successful if she had been able to.

Therefore, no fault was attributed to Miss X not being able to bid on properties.

In addition to apologising to Miss X, paying her £450 in recognition of her distress and mplementing an action plan, Camden will also distribute the findings on the complaints handling to staff responsible for responding to housing complaints, reminding them of their duties.

A Camden Council spokesperson said: “We are committed to supporting all our residents in housing need, and we are working hard to help more of the 8,000 families on our housing waiting list to move into suitable homes sooner.

“Key to this is us providing a timely and accessible housing allocation process to all of our residents. In this case, we fell short of that, and we would like to reiterate our sincere apology to the resident affected.

“Since the Ombudsman’s review, we have reduced the number of medical priority housing applications awaiting assessment by two-thirds. We have also introduced improved processes for assessing medical priority and increased the number of staff supporting residents through the medical review process.

“This is part of our commitment to keep improving our housing services to ensure that every resident receives the support they deserve.”

Harry Rodd