A man living with his uncle asked for a larger home to accommodate his three daughters during visits
City Hall, Leicester. (Image: Caitlin James)
A watchdog has upheld a complaint against Leicester City Council after a resident was left to share a two-bedroom property with his uncle and three visiting daughters.
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) found the council was at fault for procedural failings, including poor record-keeping and failing to carry out a review when requested, which caused “injustice” to the resident.
The man, known as Mr C in inspection documents, lives with his uncle and had asked for a larger home to accommodate his three daughters during overnight stays.
The council refused, citing its housing policy, which says a third bedroom can only be granted to a parent with access arrangements in exceptional cases.
The Ombudsman did not criticise the decision not to include Mr C’s uncle in the headcount, but said there was no evidence the council properly considered whether exceptional circumstances applied and did not undertake a review when it was asked to.
The news comes after the authority recently made a U-turn and decided to award two previous housing complainants the compensation recommended by the LGSCO.
The result of this complaint has raised concerns among opposition members of the Labour-led council.
A Leicester Conservatives spokesperson said: “This is yet another case where Labour’s Leicester City Council has failed a resident on something as basic as housing. The Ombudsman has again found fault with delays, poor communication and residents not being told their rights.
“This is not a one-off. It is becoming a pattern. While Labour focuses on headline schemes and vanity projects, basic services continue to fail the people of our city.
“Homes people can enjoy and services that work should be the bare minimum. Instead, residents are left chasing answers and dealing with a council that does not fix problems even when they are clearly pointed out.
“Leicester deserves a council that gets the basics right, is open with residents, and takes responsibility when things go wrong.”
The ombudsman recommended the council review the case. It has since confirmed this action was taken, but its original decision remained.
A Leicester City Council spokesperson said: “The Ombudsman confirmed that the council followed the correct process when making the original housing decision and did not find fault with that decision, which was made in line with our allocations policy.
“The only fault identified related to record keeping, which did not cause any delay or affect the outcome of this case. A further review was completed as requested, and the original decision was again upheld.
“We have strengthened our processes to ensure that future review outcomes clearly set out where exceptional circumstances have been considered.”