Decision Report 201508700

Summary

Mr C complained on behalf of his daughter (Mrs A) that the housing association discriminated against her when awarding her housing allocations points.

One of Mrs A's sons has autism and Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) said it would be beneficial for him to have his own room and access to a secure garden. Mrs A subsequently made an application to the association which was assessed and awarded ten overcrowding points. Mrs A asked for this to be reviewed as her son was disabled but was told that as her son had no accessibility issues he had not been awarded any points in recognition of this. In terms of the association's policy, she appealed further and was awarded points for overcrowding, the lack of a garden and for children living in flats and 30 Family and Social Points (these were based on the amount of support needed by Mrs A's son). The association explained that the maximum points for someone with accessibility issues was 100, whereas the maximum level of points for someone with a disability without accessibility problems was 90 points. The association said that this was to ensure that ground floor accommodation was retained for physically disabled people whereas other disabled people were not restricted to any type of accommodation.

Mr C said that this practice was unfair and Mrs A's application had not been reasonably assessed.

We took independent advice from an equalities adviser and found the association's housing allocations policy was not unfair or discriminatory. Mrs A's application had been assessed correctly in terms of the association's current policy. We did not uphold the complaint.