Summary: Mr X complains the Council has failed to meet his housing and care needs, causing avoidable distress. The Ombudsman finds the Council delayed in completing a care assessment. The Ombudsman recommends the Council provides an apology and takes action to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to meet his housing and care needs, causing avoidable distress. He says the Council is withholding his personal property and the actions of its social worker caused him to contract an infection.

2. Ms Y is employed by Lifeshare, a charity that supports homeless people. She is acting as Mr X’s representative.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I spoke to Ms Y and I reviewed documents provided by Ms Y and the Council. I gave Ms Y and the Council the chance to comment on a draft of this decision and I considered the comments provided.

Back to top

What I found

8. Certain decisions on homelessness can be challenged by the complainant seeking a review and then exercising the right of appeal to the county court on a point of law. The Ombudsman would not normally investigate complaints about those matters where the complainant has been properly informed about their rights and the council has acted on any review request.

Enquiries

9. Under s184 of the Housing Act 1996, if a council has reason to believe that an applicant may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it shall make such inquiries as are necessary to decide whether he is eligible for assistance, and if so, whether any duty is owed to him. It will inform the applicant of its decision and reasons. The applicant has the right to ask the council to review its decision.

Interim accommodation

10. Under s188 of the Housing Act 1996, if the council has reason to believe that an applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need, it must secure that accommodation is available for the applicant's occupation. The accommodation must be suitable and usually within the council’s area. If the applicant refuses an offer of interim accommodation or becomes intentionally homeless from such, the council may discharge its duty and refuse to offer further accommodation. There is no right to review such a decision.

Main housing duty

11. Where a council has completed s184 enquiries and decides a person is unintentionally homeless, eligible for assistance and has a priority need, the council must secure accommodation for the person under s193 of the Housing Act 1996. This duty can end if the applicant is no longer eligible; accepts an offer of accommodation; refuses an offer of suitable accommodation or; becomes intentionally homeless from accommodation offered. The applicant has the right to ask for a review of the suitability of the accommodation offered.

Adult social care

Care assessment

12. The purpose of an assessment is to identify the person’s needs and how these impact on their wellbeing, and the outcomes that the person wishes to achieve in their day-to-day life. The assessment will support the determination of whether any needs are eligible for care and support from the council.
13. If the council determines the person has eligible needs, it must complete a care and support plan setting out how it will meet those needs. There are different ways a council can meet a person’s needs. This could include arranging a homecare service or by putting a person in contact with a local community group or voluntary sector organisation.

What happened

14. In October 2017 Mr X presented to the Council as homeless and completed a homelessness application. The Council’s records show Mr X was known to Council services and known to have an autistic spectrum condition (“ASC”).
15. The Council offered Mr X interim accommodation in a hotel. However, in November 2017 the hotel evicted Mr X due to his behaviour. In these circumstances the Council decided to end its duty to provide interim accommodation. It kept a copy of its decision letter on file.
16. At the end of November Ms Y asked the Council to carry out a care assessment for Mr X. And, in early December a charity helped Mr X move into supported accommodation.
17. In early December 2017 the Council wrote to Mr X to inform him of its decision on his homelessness application. It said he was not homeless as he had accommodation available and reasonable for him to continue to occupy. Its letter said he could request a review of its decision within 21 days.
18. At the end of December Mr X told the Council he was struggling to remain in the accommodation due to anxiety. The Council liaised with the accommodation provider and it agreed for Mr X to return on a phased basis. Mr X returned to the accommodation.
19. In January 2018 the Council completed a care assessment for Mr X. The Council has provided a copy of this. I note that no care and support needs were identified.
20. The Council’s records show Mr X had an allocated social worker who tried to engage him with relevant support services. Mr X also had support from various council services and charities. However, the records show Mr X refused to engage with the support services or accept offers of help.
21. At the end of May 2018 Mr X was evicted due to rent arrears and unacceptable behaviour. He presented to the Council as homeless and the Council offered him interim accommodation in a hotel. Mr X refused the accommodation offered as he said it was in an unsafe area. The Council says Mr X only wanted accommodation in the city centre and it explained it had none available there. I have not seen evidence the Council told Mr X it had now ended its duty to provide interim accommodation.
22. Mr X did not complete a homelessness application but left the interview early. The Council later banned him from attending its service centre due to his threatening behaviour, though he could make contact by phone or email.
23. The Council tried to complete the homelessness application with Mr X by phone, but this was discontinued due to his behaviour.
24. In June 2018 Mr X’s social worker spoke to the homeless team on his behalf. The Council explained it had no duty to offer Mr X accommodation as he had made himself intentionally homeless.
25. In September 2018 Ms Y raised a safeguarding concern about Mr X, as he was being targeted by others and was a victim of theft. She said he needed more support to complete the homelessness application due to his ASC.
26. Lifeshare had arranged for Mr X to stay in a hotel and the Council agreed to fund this for one week to allow it to complete the homelessness assessment and a care assessment. The Council later extended the funding as it needed more time to complete the assessments. The records show the Council intended to carry out the assessments in small stages as Mr X was unable to complete them in one sitting due to his ASC.
27. The Council has provided a copy of a care assessment dated September 2018. I note the assessment is incomplete.
28. In October Ms Y complained to the Council. She said Mr X had been left on the streets without care and support. She felt the Council should be providing accommodation and support to Mr X, rather than Lifeshare.
29. Mr X’s social worker told Ms Y she would create a care and support plan once Mr X had accommodation, as she wanted to wait to see what support may be provided alongside any accommodation.
30. In November 2018 Mr X was evicted and Lifeshare arranged for him to stay in another hotel.
31. In November the Council accepted the main housing duty for Mr X.
32. At the end of November Mr X accepted an offer of accommodation but he could not move in immediately.
33. Mr X was evicted again and the Council then arranged another hotel. However, Mr X refused to stay there. Ms Y also complained the hotel was not suitable for Mr X’s needs.
34. The Council offered Mr X another hotel pending a review of the suitability of the first. Mr X did not stay at this second hotel and Ms Y told the Council he felt unsafe there and his needs were not being met. Mr X’s social worker then told him to attend the Town Hall to arrange accommodation, but he refused.
35. In January 2019 Mr X moved into his new accommodation.
36. In February 2019 the Council responded to Mr X’s review request. It noted he now had accommodation and so it had closed his case for review. It also told him he could appeal its decision to Court.
37. I have summarised the Council’s response to enquiries as follows:
• It has summarised its dealings with Mr X and provided relevant records up to January 2019;
• It offered accommodation to Mr X on many occasions but he chose not to use it;
• Agencies tried to support Mr X but he decided not to engage;
• Mr X does not have a support plan as it has not yet completed a care assessment. This is due to difficulties in getting Mr X to engage with the process;
• A social worker told Mr X he needed to collect his belongings from a hotel he had left. Mr X failed to do so and the hotel has since destroyed the items.
• It denies its social worker put Mr X at risk of infection.
• At present there is no indication Mr X meets the criteria for the Council to fund services for him, as there are community or employment options that can meet his needs.
• Social work staff continue to work closely with Mr X and partner agencies to support him and ensure he is in stable accommodation so it can complete the assessment process.

Findings

Housing

38. The Council first owed a duty to provide Mr X with interim accommodation in October 2017. The Council offered accommodation which Mr X took up. Mr X did not say the property was unsuitable and the Council’s duty ended when Mr X was evicted due to his behaviour. Though Mr X was homeless again, I find this was through no fault of the Council.
39. I note the Council kept a notice of its decision letter ending its duty under s188 on file. However, I also acknowledge the Council did not have contact details for Mr X at that time. I therefore find no fault in this regard.
40. The Council again owed a duty to Mr X when he presented as homeless in May 2018. The Council offered accommodation within its area but explained it had none available in Mr X’s preferred location. Mr X refused the accommodation offered. I find this ended the Council’s duty to provide interim accommodation and it did not have to make further offers. Though Mr X was homeless again, I find this was through no fault of the Council.
41. There is no evidence to show the Council produced a decision letter or told Mr X it had ended its duty to provide interim accommodation. However, I am satisfied Mr X was aware the Council was not assisting him further and his social worker was also informed. I therefore find no fault causing injustice.
42. In November 2018 the Council accepted the main housing duty for Mr X. At the time Mr X was staying in a hotel arranged by social services. The housing service did not have a contract with this hotel and so it offered alternative temporary accommodation to Mr X. Mr X refused to stay in the first hotel offered and questioned its suitability. The Council responded to the review request and informed Mr X of his right to appeal to Court. I will not investigate this matter further because Mr X had the opportunity to go to Court.
43. The Council offered a second hotel pending its review but Mr X also declined this. I note Ms Y questioned the suitability of this accommodation. However, the Council did not treat this as a review request. Noting it was not formally expressed as such, I do not find the Council at fault.
44. I note Mr X signed a tenancy agreement with a housing association in January 2019. I also note Mr X may have further complaints due to matters arising after this date. However, I will not investigate current or ongoing matters because the Council has not yet had the opportunity to investigate and reply.

Care

45. Having reviewed the Council’s records I find a social worker attempted to support Mr X to engage with services to no avail. The social worker spoke to Mr X’s GP and told him to visit his GP for support with his mental health, but Mr X refused. The social worker attended a drug rehabilitation service with Mr X but he refused to continue to attend sessions. A charity worker offered to help Mr X set up a bank account but Mr X refused to engage with him. Social services also tried to find temporary accommodation for Mr X on occasion, but he either refused to attend or was evicted due to his actions.
46. The Council has provided a copy of a care assessment dated September 2018. It says this is incomplete due to difficulties in getting Mr X to engage in the process and the lack of stable accommodation. However, having reviewed the Council’s records, I find no evidence Mr X’s social worker continued efforts to complete the assessment either before or after Mr X moved into a long term placement in January 2019. I therefore find the Council’s explanation for the delay is not supported by the evidence. Without a good reason for the delay, I find the Council at fault. At this stage I find this caused Mr X uncertainty about what, if any, support the Council may provide him. However, I cannot say Mr X has missed out on support while the process is not yet complete.

Personal items

47. The Council’s records show a third party disposed of Mr X’s personal items. I do not find the Council at fault.

Infection

48. There is no substantive evidence to suggest the actions of a social worker caused Mr X to contract an infection. I therefore cannot find the Council at fault.

Agreed action

49. To remedy the injustice set out above I recommend the Council carry out the following actions within one month of the date of my decision:
• provide Mr X with an apology for the delay in completing his care assessment and;
• take steps to complete Mr X’s care assessment and support plan.
50. The Council has agreed to provide Mr X with an apology and says it completed a care assessment on 15 April 2019. It says it is currently working on Mr X’s support plan.

Back to top

Final decision

51. I find the Council delayed in completing a care assessment for Mr X. The Council has accepted my recommendations and therefore I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman