Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discharge its homelessness duty when Miss X refused a final offer of accommodation. It was reasonable for her to ask for a statutory review of the Council’s decision.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s decision to end it homelessness Relief duty after it offered a rented property which she refused. She says the property was not suitable and that she should be allowed to remain under the homelessness duty.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X applied to the Council as homeless in November 2023. She was accepted under the Prevention Duty and the Council issued a personal housing plan which advised her what action she needed to take to prevent her from becoming homeless.
7. In March she became homeless and the Council accepted the Relief Duty which created a duty to find accommodation. The Council offered her a private sector rented property which Miss X refused in April because she believed it to be unsuitable.
8. The Council wrote to Miss X and told her it had discharged its homelessness relief duty because she had refused a reasonable offer of accommodation. The letter advised her of her right to seek a review of the decision under s.202 of the Housing Act 1996.
9. Miss X submitted a review request and subsequently she made a formal complaint and complained to us. The review had not been completed by the time she complained to us but any outcome carries a further right of appeal to the County Court on a point of law. This means that if the review is unsuccessful Miss X had a further appeal right.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discharge its homelessness duty when Miss X refused a final offer of accommodation. It was reasonable for her to ask for a statutory review of the Council’s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman