Summary: Mr C complains about the Council’s response to his requests for help with Mrs B’s housing and care needs and his safeguarding concerns. Mr C says Mrs B did not receive homelessness advice and help or appropriate care and he did not receive support as Mrs B’s carer. We have found fault by the Council in its failure to properly evidence it offered a carer’s assessment. We consider the agreed actions of an apology, payment and offer of a carer’s assessment provide a suitable remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr C, complains the Council failed to properly respond or take appropriate action in response to his requests for help with Mrs B’s housing and care needs or his safeguarding concerns.
2. Mr C says because of the Council’s fault, Mrs B did not receive homelessness advice and help and she is not receiving appropriate care. Mr C also says he is not receiving support as Mrs B’s carer which is harming his existing health conditions.

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. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)
5. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
6. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as housing associations. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34A, as amended)
7. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
8. 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

9. I read the papers provided by Mr C and discussed the complaint with him. I have considered some information from the Council. I explained my draft decision to Mr C and the Council and considered the comments received before reaching my final decision.
10. For clarity, I have not investigated the actions of the housing association acting as Mrs B’s landlord in relation to the reported anti-social behaviour and other tenancy related issues. These would be matters for the Housing Ombudsman and I have advised Mr C accordingly. I have also not investigated the Council’s housing management activities as these are caught by the restriction at paragraph 7 above.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation

11. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the Council on or after 3 April 2018:

• he or she is likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• he or she has been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. [Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5)]

12. If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must take a homelessness application and make inquiries. The threshold for taking an application is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular council department. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5) 
13. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help them to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. In deciding what steps they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
14. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
15. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance says, rather than advise the applicant to return when homelessness is more imminent, the housing authority may wish to accept a prevention duty and begin to take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)
16. Sections 9 and 10 of the Care Act 2014 require local authorities to carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. They must provide an assessment to all people regardless of their finances or whether the local authority thinks an individual has eligible needs. The assessment must be of the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve. It must also involve the individual and where suitable their carer or any other person they might want involved.
17. Where an individual provides or intends to provide care for another adult and it appears the carer may have any needs for support, local authorities must carry out a carer’s assessment. Carers’ assessments must seek to find out not only the carer’s needs for support, but also the sustainability of the caring role itself. This includes the practical and emotional support the carer provides to the adult.

Key events

18. The Council completed a social care assessment for Mrs B in October 2019. This highlighted that Mrs B was staying at Mr C’s property on a temporary basis as she was finding the stairs in her privately rented house difficult. Mr C contacted the Council in mid-November to ask for help for Mrs B as she was homeless and sleeping on his sofa.
19. The Council has provided a copy of Mrs B’s homeless application signed and dated 18 November which stated she had left the property she had been sharing with her daughter in October and was living with friends. The Council accepted a duty to Mrs B to prevent her from becoming homeless. The Council has provided a copy of a personal housing plan it produced following the above assessment. The Council also arranged a social care assessment for Mrs B.
20. The Council offered Mrs B a transitional tenancy which would provide Mrs B with her own temporary accommodation for a period of up to six weeks. The Council has provided transitional tenancy referrals dated 22 and 26 November. A housing application was completed with Mrs B placed in Band A.
21. The Council visited Mrs B at Mr C’s property towards the end of November. The Council says it verbally offered a carer’s assessment but this was declined. Mr C disputes the Council offered a carer’s assessment. The Council has no contemporaneous record of a carer’s assessment being discussed. I consider this constitutes fault.
22. The Council visited Mrs B at Mr C’s property in early December. The Council’s note from this visit says that Mrs B was happy to stay with her friends until a permanent tenancy was found and Mr C also confirmed this was acceptable. Mr C confirmed they had been bidding for bungalows for Mrs B and had found one. The Council confirmed once Mrs B moved to a new property it would put in place a care package of daily calls.
23. Mr C’s sister contacted the Council a few days later to say Mr C had suffered a heart attack and they could no longer accommodate Mrs B. The Council repeated its offer of a transitional tenancy but this was rejected.
24. The Council wrote to Mrs B on 16 January to end its prevention duty as it noted she had secured a social housing tenancy. This letter set out Mrs B’s right of review of the decision.
25. Mrs B moved into her new property in January 2020 with a care and support package from early February. The social care assessment in early January noted Mrs B’s friends wanted to step back from their caring role and Mrs B would be supported by carers with her shopping. The Council competed a further assessment towards the end of January. The care package was increased to include an evening call in early May.
26. Mrs B left the property at the end of May and moved back to Mr C’s property. Mr C’s sister contacted the Council to say there had been an incident involving the dog of Mrs B’s neighbour. The Council contacted the police and housing association about the incident. The housing association confirmed it had asked the neighbour to ensure their dog was on a lead when outside and the police were investigating. Mrs B did not want to return to the flat as she was concerned about reprisals for reporting the matter to the police. Mr C says there were ongoing problems with another resident which made Mrs B scared to return.
27. A care and support plan dated 29 May says care is being provided at Mr C’s address “due to safeguarding issues until further notice”. The Council has confirmed that it received no safeguarding referrals for Mrs B and the reference in the care plan is incorrect as it related to the above incident with Mrs B’s neighbour and their dog which should have been recorded as a concern and not a safeguarding matter. The Council has confirmed this has been addressed with the author of the care and support plan.
28. Mr C contacted the Council in June to say he could no longer accommodate Mrs B. The housing association confirmed to the Council that it considered Mrs B was able to return to her property but was choosing not to do so. The housing association further advised the Council that it did not consider Mrs B had priority for rehousing as she had been allocated a flat that it considered was suitable. However, it confirmed it would remove the 12 month suspension period so Mrs B could start bidding immediately for a new property.
29. Mrs B contacted the Council at the end of August to say she did not currently need the care package. The Council contacted Mrs B in early October to check if she wished to restart the care package. Mrs B confirmed she did not wish to do so at that time.
30. Mrs B’s GP sought a new social care assessment for Mrs B towards the end of November. This was completed in early December. Mrs B moved into a new bungalow in December.

My assessment

31. The threshold for councils to make homelessness enquiries is if it has ‘reason to believe that an applicant may be homeless or threatened with homelessness’. A person can be homeless if it is not reasonable to continue occupying their accommodation.
32. The Council was aware in October 2019 that Mrs B was finding it difficult to manage the stairs in her house despite adaptations and was staying at Mr C’s property on a temporary basis. In November, the Council was advised that Mrs B was similarly unable to access the upstairs bathroom at Mr C’s property and was having to use a commode downstairs and wash in the kitchen sink.
33. There is a clear indication in November 2019 that Mrs B was saying she could not return to her own home because of her disability needs which were also not being met in her temporary accommodation. I consider this was likely to meet the threshold for the Council to make homelessness enquiries. The Council has provided evidence of its assessment at the time that it owed Mrs B a prevention duty and the personal housing plan completed.
34. The Council has also provided evidence of the actions it took between November 2019 and January 2020 when it ended its prevention duty as Mrs B had secured a tenancy. I see no evidence of fault during this period other than the failure to properly record any discussion or offer of a carer’s assessment.
35. I do not consider Mrs B’s reluctance to return to her new home at the end of May 2020 because of an incident with a neighbour’s dog and concerns about her neighbour constituted a safeguarding issue. I am satisfied the Council took the appropriate action of contacting her landlord and the police and treated the matter as a tenancy management issue. I see no fault by the Council here.
36. On balance, I also do not consider the situation would necessarily have triggered further homelessness enquiries but it would have been good practice for the Council to have sought input from its homelessness service at this point to make sure it was meeting its legal duties under the Housing Act.
37. The Council has confirmed to the Ombudsman that it has held a meeting between its Adult Social Work Department and the Housing Options and Advice Service. The Council has agreed a referral criteria and process to be circulated to all staff completing social care assessments and reviews to ensure staff are reminded how to access a homelessness assessment as appropriate. The Ombudsman welcomes this action.
38. The Council has failed to provide contemporaneous evidence that it discussed and offered a carer’s assessment to Mr C. This is fault. It is difficult to assess any injustice to Mr C without the outcome of such an assessment although I have noted Mr C’s contact saying he was finding the situation untenable and his health issues. I also note a care assessment had recorded Mrs B’s friends wanted to step back from their caring roles and Mrs B suspended her package of daily calls in August when living at Mr C’s property. In the circumstances, I consider a payment in recognition of the likelihood Mr C missed out on support is required.

Back to top

Agreed action

39. The Council has agreed the following action to provide a suitable remedy:
1. write to Mr C to apologise for its failure to keep a proper record of any discussion and offer of a carer’s assessment and pay him £200 in recognition of the likelihood he missed out on support within one month of my final decision; and
2. offer to complete a carer’s assessment for Mr C if this is still appropriate within one month of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

40. I have completed my investigation as I have found fault by the Council but consider the agreed actions above are enough to provide a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman