Summary: Miss X complained she was in unsuitable accommodation and the Council made mistakes when offering her a property on three occasions. She also complained about poor communication. Miss X said the Council’s actions distressed her. There was fault in the way the Council delayed completing the suitability review. The Council did not evidence it considered its power to accommodate people during the review. The Council fault caused Miss X uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a financial payment and issue guidance to its staff.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained she was in unsuitable accommodation and the Council made mistakes when offering her a property on three occasions. She also complained about poor communication. Miss X said the Council’s actions distressed her.

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. 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)
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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have investigated Mrs X’s complaint about the council’s handling of her homelessness case since September 2023. This part of the complaint is the Council delayed completing her review request and did not accommodate her during the review.
6. I have not investigated any earlier events as Miss X could have complained about them earlier. This is a late complaint and there is not enough reason to accept those parts of it for investigation now. I reference events prior to this for context in this matter.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I read Miss X’s complaint and spoke to her about it on the phone.
8. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

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 the applicants 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)
12. 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)
13. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
14. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions:

• their eligibility for assistance;
• 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.

15. The review must be carried out by someone who was not involved in the original decision and who is more senior to the original decision maker. The reviewing officer needs to consider any information relevant to the period before the decision was made (even if only obtained afterwards) as well as any new relevant information the council has obtained since the decision. (The Homelessness (Review Procedure etc.) Regulations 2018, Homelessness Code of Guidance Chapter 19)
16. Councils must complete reviews of the following decisions within eight weeks of the date of the review request:

• eligibility for assistance;
• not in priority need;
• intentionally homeless;
• suitability of accommodation;
• notice being given of deliberate and unreasonable refusal to cooperate and the effect of the notice is to bring the relief duty to an end.

17. These periods can be extended if the applicant agrees in writing.
18. The council must advise applicants of their right to appeal to the county court on a point of law, and of the period in which to appeal. Applicants can also appeal if the council takes more than the prescribed time to complete the review. (Housing Act 1996, sections 202, 203 and 204)
19. Applicants may ask a council to provide accommodation pending the outcome of a review. Councils have a power, but not a duty, to accommodate certain applicants and members of their household. (Housing Act 1996, sections 188(3), 199A(6), 200(5))

What happened

20. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
21. The Council accommodated Miss X in 2017. Miss X has challenged the Council on her housing allocation banding and the suitability of her accommodation several times since then. Miss X’s medical assessment noted any accommodation could not be on a main road.
22. In August 2023, the Council said it would offer Miss X a property. The Council confirmed if Miss X did not accept this offer, it would end its duty to her. Miss X explained why the property was not suitable for her family. She set out it was too far from her child’s school and the property was on a main road. The Council asked its medical adviser to consider if the accommodation was suitable. The medical adviser confirmed it did not consider the property on a main road, and it was suitable for Miss X.
23. The Council formally offered Miss X the property in September 2023. Miss X turned the offer down and said the property was not suitable. She appealed the Council’s decision. Miss X asked if the Council was willing to exercise its discretion and continue to accommodate her while it completed the review.
24. The Council ended its duty to Miss X three days later. The Council gave Miss X 28 days to leave her accommodation. Miss X moved into private rented accommodation at the end of September 2023.
25. The Council accepted Miss X’s review request. It gave her until mid-October to present evidence for her appeal and confirmed it would respond by early November 2023.
26. At the start of October 2023, Miss X asked the Council for an extension to its mid-October 2023 deadline. However, she sent in all evidence by the original deadline.
27. In December 2023, the Council asked the medical adviser to reconsider the suitability of the accommodation. It wrote to Miss X to explain it would respond in January 2024 and if she sent in any more information, it would delay the case further.
28. Miss X sent the Council more medical evidence in January 2024.
29. The Council responded to Miss X’s review request in February 2024. The response accepted the property offered in September 2023 was not suitable for the family.
30. Miss X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Miss X would like the Council to provide her with long term accommodation and financially compensate her.
31. In response to my enquiries the Council stated Miss X did not ask it to accommodate her while it completed the review, and she moved into private rented accommodation. The Council also stated it delayed completing the review because Miss X sent additional information.
32. Since approaching the Ombudsman, the private landlord evicted Miss X, and the Council has provided her with accommodation.

My findings

33. I have not investigated Miss X’s late complaints. I have investigated delays in the suitability review process and consideration of providing accommodation during the review.

Delays in the review process

34. Miss X asked the Council to review the suitability of the property offered in early September 2023. The guidance says the Council had eight weeks to complete the review. The Council response was due in early November 2023. It gave Miss X a deadline to provide information of mid-October 2023. Miss X asked for an extension but provided all the information by the original deadline. The Council deadline remained early November 2023.
35. The Council wrote to Miss X in December 2023 to ask for an extension. Miss X did not agree an extension. She provided additional information. The Council considered the information and made its decision in the middle of February 2024, three and a half months after the original deadline. While Miss X did provide more information, this was after the original deadline and after the Council delayed its response originally. This delay is fault. This caused Miss X uncertainty.

Accommodating Miss X during the review

36. The Council has discretion to accommodate people while it completes a review. The Council must consider the family circumstances and assess if it will accommodate the family during the review in line with the Homelessness Code of Guidance.
37. The Ombudsman’s role is to review how councils have made decisions. We may criticise a council if, for example, it has not followed an appropriate procedure, not considered relevant information, or failed to properly explain a decision it has made. We call this ‘fault’, and where we find it, we can consider the consequences of the fault and ask the council to address these.
38. However, we do not provide a right of appeal against council decisions, and we cannot make operational or policy decisions on councils’ behalf. If we do not find fault in how a council has made a decision, then we cannot criticise it, no matter how strongly a complainant feels it is the wrong decision. We do not uphold complaints simply because someone disagrees with what a council has done.
39. The Council responded to my enquiries to say Miss X did not ask it to accommodate her during this review. I have seen evidence Miss X did ask the Council to accommodate her during the review, four days after it made the offer. The Council has not evidenced it assessed this request.
40. I cannot say the Council would have accommodated Miss X if it had completed an assessment. However, not evidencing any assessment is fault and this caused Miss X uncertainty.

Back to top

Agreed action

41. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Miss X by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Miss X for delaying completing the review and not evidencing it considered her request for it to accommodate her. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Make a symbolic payment of £200 to Miss X in recognition of the uncertainty the Council fault caused.
• Remind relevant staff to consider and evidence decision making when considering the Council’s powers to accommodate people when completing a review.
42. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

43. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Miss X.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman