Summary: We do not uphold Miss X’s complaint the Council failed to provide homelessness assistance. We find the Council at fault for delays responding to Miss X’s complaint and poor communication. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and pay her £200 for her avoidable distress and inconvenience.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains North Northamptonshire Council (‘the Council’):
1. Did not address her complaints in June 2021 and February 2022.
2. Did not provide homelessness assistance and gave her wrong advice.
3. Did not respond to her communications.
4. Did not consider medical evidence and placed her in the wrong Allocation Band.
5. Left her in unsuitable temporary accommodation.
2. Miss X says the Council’s actions caused her uncertainty, distress, and worsened her mental health.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

3. I investigated complaints (a) to (d). I did not investigate complaint (e) because Miss X has a legal right to ask the Council to review the suitability of her accommodation. If she is unhappy with the outcome of the review, there is a right of appeal to the county court on a point of law. I consider it reasonable for her to use these rights and she is familiar with them, having previously asked the Council for a review.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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)
6. 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)
7. I have not investigated Miss X’s complaint about the suitability of her temporary accommodation as she has an alternative remedy. Miss X has previously sought a housing review. It would therefore be reasonable to expect her to follow these processes first.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I spoke to Miss X and discussed her complaint. I also considered information provided by the Council.
9. Ms Y and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

10. 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.
11. 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. This is called the prevention duty. In deciding what steps, they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195
12. The council must then try to agree a personalised housing plan (PHP) with the applicant, setting out what both parties will do to try to resolve the housing problem. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A)
13. The relief duty applies when the council is satisfied that an applicant is homeless (rather than just threatened with homelessness) and eligible for assistance. The council has a duty to take reasonable steps to help the applicant secure accommodation that will be available for at least six months. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B and Homelessness Code of Guidance 13.2)
14. If homelessness is not successfully relieved, a housing authority will owe the main housing duty to applicants who are eligible, have a priority need for accommodation and are not homeless intentionally. Councils must ensure that suitable accommodation is available for the applicant and their household until the duty is brought to an end, usually through the offer of a settled home. (Housing Act 1996, section 193(2))

Housing Allocations

15. 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))
16. The Ombudsman may not find fault with a council’s assessment of a housing application if it has applied its published allocations scheme to the applicant’s case.
17. The Council’s allocation scheme states:
• Band A includes applicants the Council considers as emergencies because of a main housing duty or a severe medical need. Band B includes those threatened with homelessness, are homeless and owed a relief duty and those with an urgent medical need.
• A non-dependent child is usually aged 18 years or over or aged 16/17 and who is not attending or enrolled in any full-time approved nonadvanced education or training.
• Family accommodation is a house, or a flat offering 2 or more bedrooms with its own garden. Households only containing adult sons/daughters, and/or other non-dependents are not eligible to be considered for family accommodation except in exceptional circumstances.
• Band A priority applicants will receive extra support to ensure a timely resolution of emergency housing needs. All Band A applicants including the homeless, are placed on the Council’s software system called Autobid. This automatically places bids on eligible properties.

The Council’s complaints procedure

18. The Council acknowledges all complaints by email within three working days. It aims to respond to complaints at stage one and stage two within 20 working days. If it is complex the Council may seek further information and take longer but it will let the complainant know in advance.

What happened

19. Miss X joined the Council’s housing register with her adult daughter (Miss N) in September 2019. The Council awarded a Band B priority based on their medical needs.

June 2021- Homelessness assistance and Miss X’s complaint

20. In June 2021, Miss X approached the Council for homelessness assistance. She said her landlord had sent her an eviction notice (‘notice’).
21. In late June, Miss X sent an online complaint. She said the Council had not contacted her about the notice. She was also unhappy with her housing choices which meant she could only bid for flats in her preferred area or bungalows outside it. Miss X said she sent GP letters and other medical evidence to support this, but the Council had not applied discretion to help her. Miss X’s MP also sent separate complaint letters.
22. The Council records show it telephoned Miss X and asked her to send the notice. It conducted a full housing assessment but decided not to progress Miss X’s homelessness application. The Council told Miss X the notice was not in the correct format and was therefore invalid. It offered Miss X general housing advice and referred her to mental health support services. It also arranged for an officer to help Miss X understand her housing options and bid for suitable properties.
23. In July, the Council sent Miss X a stage 2 complaint response. It apologised for not responding earlier and explained some of Miss X’s complaints were addressed at stage 1 with her MP. It also set out its response to the notice as above. The Council explained why Miss X and her daughter were not eligible for family accommodation with reference to its allocations policy as set out in paragraph 16.

November 2021- Homelessness assistance

24. In November, Miss X received a further notice. Miss X approached the Council again for homelessness assistance.
25. The allocated housing officer (HO) completed an assessment and a personalised housing plan (PHP). The Council accepted a prevention duty. Miss X said she was advised by an officer not to leave her property, but she said she was worried about the legal costs mentioned in the landlord’s solicitor’s letters.
26. Miss X said she telephoned the HO throughout December and left messages on the Council’s main switchboard without response. She said this affected her anxiety levels as she believed the eviction date was fast approaching.

2022-Homelessness Reviews

27. In early January, the HO reviewed Miss X’s case. He told her she could remain in the property until the landlord applied to court and got a possession order.
28. The HO also spoke with the landlord who said they would not contact Miss X until they had a possession order. The HO updated Miss X about the discussion. However, it is unclear if Miss X understood the difference between the notice and the court order.
29. Miss X said she tried to reach the HO in January and February, but he was unavailable.

Miss X’s further Complaint

30. In February, Miss X sent a further online complaint. In brief, she was unhappy with:
• The Council’s management of her homelessness application.
• Advice from a Council officer that if she left the property, she would be making herself intentionally homeless and would no longer qualify for help and be liable for court costs.
• The Council’s decision she was not eligible for family accommodation despite her medical evidence
• The HO’s unexplained absence.
31. In March a new housing officer (NHO) took over Miss X’s case and:
• Remained in regular communication with Miss N and checked if Miss X had any specific needs for future housing. She also confirmed Miss X was willing to be moved into temporary accommodation if a suitable property could not be found in time.
• Sought documents to assess Miss X’s medical needs and ordered an occupational therapy assessment.
• Obtained further evidence from Miss X to confirm she no longer had money left from the sale of a property. The NHO completed enquiries so she could put in an exceptional circumstances report and get a Band A priority for Miss X.
32. The NHO later emailed Miss X and confirmed the court had set a hearing date for 31 May and she would not need to leave the property until that point. The Council accepted a main housing duty and promoted Miss X to Band A priority. The records do not indicate Miss X was held liable for any court costs.
33. In June, the Council placed Miss X in temporary accommodation.

Council complaint responses

34. In its stage 1 complaint response, the Council:
• Explained it followed correct procedures after Miss X’s homelessness assistance requests in June and November 2021, as set out in paragraph 21 and paragraphs 23-27 and 30-32.
• Apologised for the incorrect advice that Miss X had to remain in occupation, or she would be making herself intentionally homeless. This was given by a temporary officer who was unaware of the Council’s position and the Council no longer employed temporary officers.
• Explained the Council provides a grant for legal costs which is not repayable, and this should have been explained to Miss X.
• Explained why Miss N did not qualify as a dependent child and therefore Miss X and Miss N therefore did not qualify for family accommodation. It referred Miss X to the allocation scheme.
• Apologised for the HO’s lack of communication. It said he was on leave for six weeks before leaving post. The Council did not consider immediately reallocating the HO’s caseload while he was away until he resigned. At this point Miss X’s case was allocated to the NHO who made good progress with her application.
35. Unhappy with the Council’s response, Miss X bought her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Was there fault and did it cause injustice?

i) The Council did not address her complaints in June 2021 and February 2022.

36. The Council provided a full response to Miss X’s June 2021 complaint, which addressed her concerns. However, it did not acknowledge her complaint in accordance with its timescales as set out in its complaints policy in paragraph 17 (above). This was fault. This caused Miss X avoidable uncertainty, frustration, and anxiety until she eventually received a response.
37. Miss X submitted her further complaint in February 2022. The Council provided a full response to her concerns in May. The records do not show it acknowledged Miss X’s complaint. Its response time was also not in line with its complaints’ policy timescales. The Council’s delay was fault. This caused Miss X avoidable uncertainty and anxiety.

ii) The Council did not provide homelessness assistance and gave her wrong advice.

38. The Council followed the law and its allocations scheme, as set out in paragraphs 9-13 and 14-16, in assessing Miss X’s homelessness applications in June and November 2021. It did not continue her June application as she was not considered at threat of homelessness. The records show, in November it assessed Miss X’s situation, made enquiries, offered support and processed her application quickly. It accepted its main housing duty and increased Miss X to a priority Band A. She was then placed in temporary accommodation. I do not find the Council at fault with this point.
39. However, the Council has admitted fault for advice given to Miss X about remaining in her property. It has apologised for this and confirmed temporary officers are no longer used. This failure to give correct information was poor communication. Miss X consequently suffered avoidable anxiety and distress. The Council has also apologised for not making Miss X aware that she would not have to pay costs because the Council has a scheme to cover these. The Council’s failure to inform Miss X was poor service and communication. It caused Miss X further avoidable uncertainty and distress.

iii) The Council housing officer did not respond to her communications

40. The Council has apologised and explained the reasons for the HO’s lack of communication was due to unexpected sick leave and subsequent notice. However, the Council should have reviewed the HO’s cases in his absence, responded to urgent queries or at least told applicants about the reasons for any delays. This was poor planning and service delivery which caused Miss X avoidable anxiety and frustration about her application.

iv) The Council did not consider Miss X’s medical evidence and placed her in the wrong Allocation Band

41. The records indicate the Council previously considered Miss X’s medical evidence and applied its allocations policy in putting her in a suitable band. The Council also explained why Miss X was not eligible for certain types of housing. Miss X was in Band B before the Council accepted a main housing duty. Following her homelessness application, the Council applied its policy and increased her to Band A. I cannot criticise the Council’s decision to place Miss X in Band B initially as it followed its policy. I find no fault with the Council’s consideration of Miss X’s medical evidence and how it selected Miss X’s allocation band.

Back to top

Agreed action

42. The Council should, within a month of my final decision:
• Write to Miss X and apologise for the faults identified in this statement
• Make a payment of £200 to reflect Miss X’s avoidable frustration, anxiety and time and trouble.

Back to top

Final decision

43. I find the Council at fault for delays in responding to Miss X’s complaints and advice provided and poor communication. I do not find fault in relation to the way it processed Miss X’s homelessness applications and decided her housing allocation band. The Council should apologise to Miss X and make a payment of £200 to remedy the injustice.
44. I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman