Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s actions in relation to her housing. We found fault because the Council failed to consider aspects of Miss X’s case in a timely or adequate manner. It also failed to investigate her complaints within the timeframe it should. This caused Miss X avoidable distress and uncertainty. To remedy the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Miss X, and issue reminders and share guidance with relevant officers.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s actions in relation to her housing situation. Specifically, she complains it has:
• not properly considered whether her privately rented accommodation is reasonable to occupy;
• not assessed medical information related to her priority on its housing register in a timely manner;
• not properly dealt with her homelessness application as a result of a threatened eviction; and
• has not properly dealt with her complaints to it in a timely manner.
2. Miss X says this has caused her distress and frustration and affected her quality of life.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, 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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. My investigation begins when Miss X first complained to the Council in February 2023. This is more than 12 months from when Miss X approached us to make her complaint for the second time. I am satisfied it is relevant to include this period in my investigation as this is when Miss X first complained to the Council but her complaint was not dealt with.
7. My investigation ends early in August 2024 when Miss X approached us to make her complaint for the second time. This was after the Council had completed its complaint process and after medical assessments had been completed.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I have considered all the information Miss X provided. I have also asked the Council questions and requested information, and in turn have considered the Council’s response.
9. Miss X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I have taken any comments received into consideration before reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Homelessness legislation and statutory guidance

10. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them and anyone who lives with them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
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.
12. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the council on or after 3 April 2018:

• they are likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• they have been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5)

Section 21 notice and possession order

13. Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 (S21) allows landlords to take back possession of their property if it had been let under an assured shorthold tenancy. It does not need to state a reason or fault for the eviction. The notice must give tenants at least two months’ notice to leave the property.
14. A possession order is a court order which a landlord can apply for if they have served a valid S21 notice. The court must make an outright order, which sets a date for possession, if the S21 notice was valid. If a tenant stays in the property after the date set by an outright order, then a landlord can apply for a bailiffs warrant to remove the tenant.

Reasonable to occupy

15. Section 6.23 of the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the Code) says that a person shall not be treated as having accommodation unless it is accommodation which would be reasonable for them to continue to occupy. The Code states there is no simple test of reasonableness and that is for the housing authority to make a judgement on the facts of each case.

What happened

16. I have set out below a summary of the key events. This is not meant to show everything that happened.
17. Miss X has various medical and health needs. After being threatened with homelessness in 2020, the Council helped Miss X to secure private rented accommodation, Property A. The Council was satisfied it was suitable for her and her household at that time. Because of this, it ended its duty to prevent her becoming homeless.

2023

18. On 27 February 2023, Miss X complained to the Council. She was still living at Property A. Miss X was unhappy because she said it was unsuitable for her medical needs. She said she had not been given enough help to find an adapted property. The Council acknowledged her complaint and said it would aim to respond within 10 working days.
19. Around the same time, a social worker requested an up-to-date occupational therapist (OT) assessment be carried out on Miss X. The Council also contacted Miss X and asked her to provide up-to-date medical information.
20. On 26 June, the Council received the OT report. Amongst other things, the report recommended a wheelchair accessible property. The Council decided it needed more medical information about Miss X’s health needs and asked her to provide up-to-date documents.
21. On 22 August, Miss X emailed medical documents directly to the officer who had asked her to provide them. Miss X received an automated response to say the officer was on leave until early September and emails would not be monitored.
22. On 26 September, the Council contacted Miss X to chase the medical documents it requested. After further communication, she re-emailed the documents to the Council and it uploaded them to its portal for her.
23. The Council was satisfied it had received the relevant medical information and passed the case to its medical assessment team. It told Miss X it would take eight weeks to complete its assessment so it would be finalised by late November.
24. On 5 October, Miss X complained to the Council about the disrepair in her accommodation. The Council replied to say that it had referred the matter to its private rented sector housing team and that someone would be in contact. It said it had also referred her case to the housing advisory service who would be in touch to discuss housing options.
25. On 13 October, Miss X contacted the Council to advise she had received an S21 eviction notice from her landlord. She made a complaint to us a few days later.
26. On 25 October, Miss X chased contact from the Council regarding the S21 notice she had received.
27. On 27 October, the Council emailed Miss X to apologise for the earlier miscommunication about where to send her medical documentation. It confirmed the assessment would be completed by 24 November 2023.
28. Miss X and the Council discussed her S21 notice and housing needs in a telephone call on 7 November. In further discussions, the Council then advised Miss X that if the energy performance certificate (EPC) for the property was out of date it would mean any S21 notice served was invalid.
29. Miss X called the Council on 13 November to chase for an update on her medical assessment.
30. On 15 November, the Council asked Miss X for more medical information. It asked her for an up-to-date physiotherapy report and any documents that included any recent medical procedures.
31. On 17 November, Miss X sent the Council a copy of the S21 and the EPC for the property.
32. The Council called Miss X to discuss her S21 notice, on 22 November. The next day it sent her a letter to confirm its stance. It confirmed the S21 notice was invalid because of the out-of-date EPC. The Council said it would close its homelessness case as it owed her no duty.
33. On 23 November, we approached the Council to ask if Miss X had completed its corporate complaints process. The Council responded to both Miss X and to us. It used the same reference number as the one given to Miss X when she had complained in February. The Council advised it had logged the complaint and would aim to respond within 10 working days.

2024

34. On 5 January 2024, Miss X chased the Council for a decision on her medical assessment. The Council said medical recommendations were still pending and that it was not always possible to complete the assessment within 56 days. It said it was waiting for additional information from other parties and that officer leave and the office being closed had affected the time taken. The Council apologised for the delay.
35. The Council sent its stage one complaint response on 24 January. It said although the S21 notice had been invalid, it was not satisfied it had properly considered Miss X’s medical concerns. The Council upheld Miss X’s complaint and said it was making further enquiries into her case.
36. On 25 January, the Council spoke to Miss X about her housing situation. She advised she had received another S21 notice late in November 2023. It asked her to provide evidence by the beginning of February 2024.
37. Miss X escalated her complaint on 31 January.
38. The Council chased relevant documents related to the S21 with Miss X’s lettings agent on 12 February.
39. On 14 February, the Council received the updated OT report. The report agreed with the previous one and continued to recommend a wheelchair accessible property.
40. The Council received the electrical installation certificate (EIC) for Miss X’s property from the letting’s agent on 26 February. On the same day, the Council advised Miss X the S21 notice she had received was invalid due to the property having no valid EIC. The Council said it had advised Miss X’s letting agent.
41. On 12 March, the Council sent its stage two complaint response. The Council said that apart from the issues relating to the validity of the S21 notice, it agreed with Miss X’s point that issues within the property might mean it was unreasonable for her to occupy. The Council confirmed it noted her mobility issues, was arranging a home visit from a housing officer and had completed its complaint procedure. It signposted Miss X to the Ombudsman.
42. At the beginning of April, the Council told Miss X of the result of its medical assessment. It classed her status as needing a wheelchair adapted property. The Council said she would be made a direct offer of a property.
43. At the end of May, Miss X emailed the Council to say she was unable to make contact with the officer who had been dealing with her housing case. She had been issued with possession orders which said she needed to leave Property A by the end of May 2024. The Council apologised and said the officer had left the team. The Council gave details of the officer her case had been reallocated to. Miss X sent copies of the possession orders to the Council.
44. On 11 June, Miss X again contacted the Council as she had not spoken with her new caseworker despite two arranged dates to do so.
45. At the beginning of August, Miss X again approached us to progress her complaint about the Council, now that she had completed its complaints process.
46. When Miss X came to us, she was still living in Property A.
47. Miss X has confirmed the Council made her a direct offer of a wheelchair accessible property in 2025 which she accepted and has moved into.

Analysis

Privately rented accommodation

48. As part of my enquiries to the Council, I asked whether it had considered, in line with the Code, if Miss X’s property was reasonable to occupy since the time she had complained about it in February 2023.
49. In response, the Council said it had done a home visit to the property at the beginning of February 2024. It directed me to the visit report which noted Miss X struggled to meet her needs in the property.
50. The Council completed the home visit as part of its investigation into Miss X’s housing. It promised this in its stage one complaint response of January 2024 when it decided it had not fully considered Miss X’s medical concerns in relation to her housing.
51. The Council’s stage two complaint response agreed with Miss X’s opinion that ‘issues in the property could, however, mean the accommodation is potentially not available or is otherwise unreasonable to occupy.’
52. However, the stage two response sent after the home visit did not make a decision as to whether the accommodation was suitable to occupy. Instead, it said it could see the officer had progressed the case by arranging the visit and contacting its private rented sector team.
53. In the circumstances of this complaint, I am satisfied the Council has not shown it properly considered whether Property A was suitable for Miss X to occupy. The consideration it gave to her circumstances was almost a year after she had first contacted it about the difficulties she faced and was because of a stage one complaint response she had waited over eight months to receive.
54. In the circumstances of this complaint, I am satisfied not giving Miss X’s case timely or proper consideration was fault. It would have caused her distress and frustration. It also caused her uncertainty as to what the Council’s position on the matter was. I have made a recommendation below to remedy this injustice.

Providing the medical information

55. Following on from medical information Miss X provided earlier in 2023, an officer asked Miss X for supporting medical information late in June 2023. The officer did not specify how these documents should be sent or uploaded. Miss X emailed the officer directly and attached the documents in mid-August. Although an automated message said the officer was on leave and emails would not be monitored, Miss X was not asked to re-send her documents when the officer returned to work.
56. It was not until the Council called Miss X at the end of September 2023 to chase the medical documents that Miss X was asked to upload them to a specific portal.
57. After further communication, Miss X emailed the documents and the Council uploaded them to its portal. The medical assessment process then began.
58. I am satisfied that in the circumstances of this complaint, not advising Miss X how to upload her documents when it requested them in June was fault. Not redirecting her when she sent them to the individual officer was also fault. This would have caused Miss X avoidable distress and frustration. The lack of communication also caused a delay of around three weeks before the Council started its medical assessment process. I have made a recommendation below to remedy this injustice.

Carrying out the medical assessment

59. The Council advised Miss X it would take up to eight weeks to complete its medical assessment.
60. Evidence shows that Miss X called to chase for an update six weeks after the Council confirmed it had received her documents. The Council responded asking Miss X for more information. When Miss X said she did not have any other documents to send, the Council said it would assess based on what it already had.
61. It was then not until one month later in mid-December 2023, and 10 weeks after the assessment process had begun, that the Council progressed the assessment and asked local health services for an updated physiotherapy report. Health services advised the next day there was no updated report to send.
62. It was then another month before the Council progressed matters and asked the OT service for an up-to-date report.
63. When it received this three weeks later in mid-February 2024, the Council took no further action until the beginning of April 2024, over seven weeks later. The Council then acted swiftly to advise Miss X she had been assessed as needing a wheelchair accessible property.
64. In the circumstances of this complaint, I am satisfied the Council did not act in a decisive or timely manner in progressing Miss X’s medical assessment. This would have caused Miss X distress and frustration and meant she had to wait for an answer longer than she should have done due to delays on the Council’s part. I have made a recommendation below to remedy this injustice.

Homelessness application

65. Miss X complains the Council did not properly deal with her homelessness application as a result of a threatened eviction.
66. Four days after Miss X sent it a copy of her S21 notice in November 2023, the Council sent her a letter and advised the notice was invalid and it would close her case. I find no fault in the Council’s actions here.
67. The Council was again advised of Miss X’s second S21 late in January 2024. It chased documents with her lettings agent and as soon as these were received, it advised both the agent and Miss X the S21 was invalid. I find no fault in the Council’s actions here.
68. When Miss X sent the Council a copy of the possession orders in May 2024, there is no evidence of it making enquiries as to whether Miss X may require emergency accommodation. Therefore, there is no evidence the Council considered, at this time, its duties under homelessness legislation. This lack of consideration is fault. It would have caused Miss X distress, frustration and uncertainty. I have made a recommendation below to remedy this injustice.

Complaint handling

69. When Miss X complained to the Council at the end of February 2023, it acknowledged this and said it would respond in 10 working days or contact her if there was going to be a delay. There is no evidence the complaint was responded to at this time.
70. Instead, the investigation process was re-started when we contacted the Council in November 2023 to check if Miss X had completed its complaints process before coming to us. The Council used the same reference number and complaint points when re-starting the process.
71. The Council then took 35 working days to respond. Although the Council apologised for this delay, there is no evidence Miss X was advised of it during the waiting period. It should have advised Miss X of the delay, according to its policy.
72. The Council should have responded to Miss X’s original complaint by the middle of March 2023. The lack of any initial response was fault.
73. When the complaint was addressed late in 2023, it should have responded by mid-December. Instead, it took more than three times its specified target to respond to Miss X and sent this towards the end of January 2024. The lack of a timely response after re-allocation or any communication about delays in that response was also fault. The faults would have caused Miss X distress and frustration. They also meant her ability to escalate the complaint and bring it to us was delayed. I have made a recommendation below to remedy the injustice caused.
74. The Council’s stage two final response was sent the day before the 30-working days the Council states in its policy. However, there is no evidence it sent Miss X a draft copy of the final response which is what its policy says it will do. Not adhering to its own policy was fault. This would have added to the distress and frustration Miss X had already experienced. I have made a recommendation below to remedy this injustice.

Back to top

Agreed action

75. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within four weeks of the date of my final decision:
• apologise to Miss X for the identified injustice;
• make a symbolic payment to Miss X of £200 to reflect the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by the identified injustice;
• make a symbolic payment of £100 to reflect the time and trouble taken to progress her complaint;
• remind relevant officers and managers of the need to specify how medical information should be shared with it;
• remind relevant officers and managers to comply with their responsibilities under relevant homelessness guidance and legislation; and
• share the Ombudsman’s guidance on the principles of good administrative practice with relevant officers and managers.
76. The apology written should be in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies on making an effective apology.
77. Payments made are in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies.
78. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

79. I have now completed my investigation. I uphold this complaint with a finding of fault causing an injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman