Summary: Mr C complained the Council unreasonably refused to accept his daughter as part of his household for his homelessness and housing register applications and did not properly assess his priority. Mr C says he was living in overcrowded conditions which caused both him and his family distress. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr C, complains the Council has unreasonably refused to accept his two-year-old daughter as part of his household for his homelessness and housing register applications and has not properly assessed his priority. Mr C says because of the Council's fault, he is living in overcrowded conditions which is causing both him and his family distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)
4. 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

5. I read the papers provided by Mr C’s representative and discussed the complaint with them. I have considered some information from the Council and provided a copy of this to Mr C’s representative after removing some third party information. I have explained my draft decision to Mr C’s representative and the Council and provided an opportunity for comment.

Back to top

What I found

Background and legislation

6. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing.  All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme  (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14)).
7. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application or a housing applicant’s priority if it has carried this out in line with its published allocations scheme. The Ombudsman recognises that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. He may not find fault with a council for failing to re-house someone, if it has prioritised applicants and allocated properties according to its published lettings scheme policy.
8. 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.
9. 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).
10. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need (Housing Act 1996, section 188).
11. Examples of applicants in priority need are:

• people with dependent children
• pregnant women
• people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems, disability or old age

12. Councils must take reasonable steps to secure 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).
13. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions:

• their eligibility for assistance
• what duty (if any) is owed to them if they are found to be homeless or threatened with homelessness
• the steps they are to take in their personalised housing plan at the prevention duty stage
• giving notice to bring the prevention duty to an end
• the steps they are to take in their personalised housing plan at the relief duty stage
• giving notice to bring the relief duty to an end
• giving notice in cases of deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate
• to notify their case to another authority when the Council considers the conditions for referral are met
• whether the conditions are met for the referral of their case to another housing authority
• the conditions for referral to another authority are not met so the notifying housing authority owes the main housing duty
• the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation offered under section 200(3) and section 193). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.

Council’s allocations policy

14. The Council’s Allocations Policy dated February 2017 says the following:

Paragraph 8.5

“Except in exceptional cases, the Council defines a permanent member of the household as someone who can evidence that they have resided as part of the household as their sole residence for at least the past twelve months, and can provide evidence sufficient to satisfy the Council of this.”

Paragraph 8.10

“There may be informal agreements between separated parents to share the care of their children and they may stay with each parent on a regular basis. However, only in the most exceptional circumstances would a child/children be considered as needing accommodation with more than one parent for the purposes of applications for social housing”.

Paragraph 8.11

“In assessing whether there is a bedroom shortage for the purposes of awarding a priority and in deciding the size of property an applicant is eligible for, an assessment will be made on the facts of each case. In reaching a decision regard will be had to what is considered to be the child’s prime residence i.e. where they stay overnight, where there is financial dependency including which parent claims child benefit, which parent the child is dependent upon for daily care as well as social factors such as where the child goes to school.”

Key events

15. Mr C approached the Council in March 2019 about his housing situation and explained his daughter had lived with him for the last three months but they now needed to move out of his mother’s property. The Council asked Mr C to provide some additional information including details of parental responsibility and child benefit award letter.
16. Mr C completed an online application to join the housing register in March. This confirmed his daughter had been living with him at his mother’s property since December 2018. Mr C also advised his mother had asked him to move out.
17. Mr C also completed a homelessness application form in March. This also advised that his daughter had been living with him at his mother’s property for three months but he had been asked to leave due to overcrowding.
18. The Council assessed Mr C’s circumstances in accordance with the Housing Act 1996, section 189A and issued him an assessment letter in March. This set out that Mr C did not currently receive child benefit for his daughter and it had assessed him as having a one bedroom accommodation need.
19. The Council was satisfied Mr C was threatened with homelessness within 56 days and his application was provided to the Council’s prevention team with an appointment scheduled for early April. Mr C advised the Council at his meeting in April that his daughter had previously stayed with him three or four days a week. The Council asked when this arrangement had become more permanent. Mr C stated he had taken her for the night but had not returned her due to concerns about neglect. The Council made a safeguarding referral to its social services team about the concerns Mr C had raised and sought information about who the primary carer was for his daughter.
20. The mother of Mr C’s daughter stated she was seeking a court order as Mr C was refusing to return their daughter and would not engage in mediation. Mr C’s daughter was still listed as part of the household at her mother’s address for her mother’s housing benefit claim. Mr C disputed his former partner’s account.
21. The Council says in these circumstances it was not straightforward to decide who the primary carer was for Mr C’s daughter and its initial enquiries indicated her primary residence was with her mother.
22. The Council accepted a prevention duty to Mr C in April and provided advice including that it would consider him for a relief duty if he became homeless. The Council also provided a personal housing plan to Mr C in April. The Council continued to make enquiries about whether to include Mr C’s daughter on his homelessness application.
23. The Council had also considered Mr C’s application to join the housing register and decided he had a one bedroom need for social housing purposes. The Council awarded Mr C Band D2 for the housing register as he was living with his mother in the family home. The Council wrote to Mr C with this decision on 9 April. The Council’s letter set out Mr C’s right to request a review of this decision. Mr C did not make such a request.
24. The Council has confirmed that Mr C has placed two bids for properties since joining the housing register. On 13 April 2019 Mr C bid for a one bedroom flat and the successful applicant was a D2 household that had been registered since 16 April 2014. On 24 October 2019 Mr C bid for a two bed house and the applicant offered the property was a C1 household that had been registered since 21 August 2019.
25. Mr C contacted the Council again in September about his housing situation. The Council made further enquiries with social services and the mother of Mr C’s daughter. The Council identified there had been a change in circumstances as Mr C now received universal credit and financial support for childcare costs and the mother of his daughter confirmed she was no longer pursuing a court order and had not been in contact with her daughter.
26. The Council wrote to Mr C on 21 October to confirm his Band remained as D2 but that he could now bid for two bedroom properties. The Council’s letter set out his right of appeal about his priority banding. Mr D did not appeal.
27. The Council offered Mr C a private rented two bedroom property in October which he accepted in November . This ended Mr C’s homelessness application and discharged the Council’s prevention duty. The Council wrote to Mr C accordingly with its decision and set out his right to request a review. Mr C did not seek a review.

My consideration

28. Mr C informed the Council that his daughter had been living with him for three months when he originally approached the Council. He explained before that she lived with her mother but stayed with him three to four times a week until he decided not to return her to her mother’s care. At the time of Mr C’s approach to the Council to apply to the housing register and for homeless assistance the Council did not consider his daughter to be a permanent member of his household as her main home was the social home available to her with her mother. Mr C could also not show she had been part of his household for at least the past twelve months. The Council’s policy sets out that it would only that only consider a child needed accommodation with more than one parent for the purposes of social housing in exceptional circumstances and these did not apply in this case. Mr C was also not in receipt of child benefit for his daughter at the time of his application.
29. The Council refers to caselaw which sets out that where a child has accommodation available to them with one parent, it is unlikely that a council would be required to provide a second home to the same child. The Council used its discretion to increase its search for private rented housing for Mr C from a one bedroom to a two bedroom property.
30. Based on the information provided, I am satisfied that the Council considered Mr C’s application to join the housing register in line with its allocations policy based on the information available at that time. The Council subsequently amended Mr C’s application to allow him to bid for two bedroom properties on receiving additional information.
31. I have also seen no fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr C’s homeless application in March 2019. The Council completed an assessment of his housing needs, provided a tailored personalised housing plan and accepted him for its prevention duty in accordance with the relevant legislation and information available at the time.
32. The Council would have ended this duty and opened a relief duty if Mr C had been made homeless from his mother’s property and assessed at that time if he was in priority need. Any decision by the Council about whether Mr C was in priority need would have had a right of appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

33. I have completed my investigation as I have found no evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman