Summary: Mr D complains the Council failed to deal with his homelessness and housing register applications. I have found extensive fault by the Council. It failed to process Mr D’s homelessness application and issue a decision. It also failed to activate Mr D’s housing register account for over two years. The Council has agreed to take action to activate the housing register account, meet with Mr D to discuss his case and pay him redress for distress.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Mr D) says the Council failed to deal with his homelessness and housing register applications in line with procedures. Mr D told me his housing register account has remained suspended since it was created in 2024, and he never received a decision or assistance regarding his homelessness application.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

4. My investigation has considered events from March 2024 through to May 2025 when the Council issued its final stage complaint response. I have advised Mr D that if he is concerned about the Council’s actions after May 2025, he can make a new complaint. Once he completes the complaints process, he has the option to bring a new case to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Mr D and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. I shared my draft decision with both parties and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

7. On 4 March 2024 Mr D submitted an online homelessness application to the Council. He also says he applied to join the housing register. He chased up the Council on 8 March stating he was due to be homeless in April. He had a serious medical condition and his wife was pregnant. He reiterated this was homelessness application and he needed to speak to an Officer. On 14 March Mr D also submitted a hard copy of the housing register application to the Council.
8. Mr D says he visited the Council’s offices on 25 March to find out how his case was progressing, he spoke to the Housing Solutions Officer (Housing Officer) assigned to his case. As a result of that visit the Housing Officer emailed him about the documents he needed to supply for his ‘housing application’. Mr D provided those documents the next day and told the Council he wanted to join the housing register. On 4 April Mr D sent the Housing Officer details of private sector rental properties he had found, he had not been accepted by letting agents because his family did not have the funds for a deposit/ rent guarantee. He asked what would happen on the 18 April when the eviction notice expired. Also on 4 April the Housing Officer wrote to Mr D, the Council had completed its assessment of his housing register application. It had awarded him 10 housing points. It did not explain what the 10 points were awarded for. It said he could bid for advertised social housing properties using the home connections site and set out how to log into his housing register account (account). Mr D says he visited the Council again on 15 April and the Housing Officer told him to stay at the property.
9. On 14 May Mr D emailed the Housing Officer about changes to the circumstances of the household. His wife was pregnant and their child, when born, would require surgery. He was also due to have a major operation soon. He was concerned the family had to wait to be evicted and had not heard back about the housing register application. On 21 May Mr D emailed the Council that he had not heard about his housing register application made in March. On 11 June Mr D sent the Housing Officer additional medical information about the family. The Housing Officer replied he would have the housing register application ‘live by today’. The eviction date for the family was in July, and he intended to source accommodation for the family before then. He noted the family needed to be near a specific hospital because of the surgery required for Mr D’s unborn child.
10. On 1 July Mr D emailed the Housing Officer, he had been calling and not had a response. He had also visited the Council in June. He was concerned about his family’s housing situation. The Council says that ‘relief attributes awarded’ on 2 July. It has not supplied supporting documents. This appears to relate to the homelessness application but there is no evidence a relief duty was accepted on this date, and no decision letter was issued. On 5 July Mr D emailed the Housing Officer as he had not heard back. He said he had made six visits to the Council for updates (about the homelessness application) and had been told the case was progressing but had not received any letters confirming what action was being taken. He had also not heard about his housing register application. The situation was causing significant distress to his family and exacerbating his medical conditions.
11. On 9 July Mr D submitted a formal complaint to the Council. He had not received a decision on his homelessness application and there had been minimal communications from the Housing Officer. The medical needs of the family had not been assessed for the housing register. On 22 July the Housing Officer emailed the Housing Health and Disability Team (HHD Team) with medical documents for the family. On the same day the HHD Team replied that the Housing Officer had spoken to the Team and stated he wanted an assessment for recommendations about temporary accommodation. The Team would show the Housing Officer how to make a referral.
12. The Council replied to Mr D’s complaint on 23 July. It apologised for the lack of contact by the Housing Officer. It said the Housing Officer had started the process to source suitable interim accommodation for the family with support from the HHD Team who would make recommendations based on the medical evidence Mr D had provided. On 28 July Mr D’s partner told the Council the complaint response was not adequate. On 15 August Mr D emailed the Council again chasing up what was happening with his homelessness case. He asked the Council to escalate his complaint because he had not received a decision about the housing register application.
13. On 19 August Mr D told the Housing Officer his new child should be added to the homelessness application. The Housing Officer replied that he would ‘try to get [Mr D] temporary accommodation this week’ and would ‘start the paperwork today’. On 10 September Mr D emailed the Housing Officer, the family were travelling to hospital every day. They needed the housing register account resolved so they could start looking for social housing. Their landlord had offered to extend their tenancy, but they could not afford the increased rent. The Housing Officer told Mr D, on the same day, he would make a prevention fund application to make up the additional rent payments needed for the family to stay at the property. He had contacted the landlord to start this process. Mr D said he was happy for this action to be taken.
14. In March 2025 Mr D requested the Ombudsman consider his case, we asked the Council to provide a final stage complaint response to Mr D. The Councill issued that response on 2 May. It accepted the request for the final stage complaint was made on 28 July 2024 and had not been responded to. It had reallocated the case to a new Housing Officer so a ‘prompt decision’ relating to the housing register application could be issued. The Housing Officer would contact Mr D for updated medical information and contact the landlord for an update on the eviction process. Mr D should remain in the property whilst the Council worked to resolve the housing situation. The Council accepted the actions in the July 2024 complaint response had not been carried out. It said it was waiting for a decision about whether Mr D should be awarded medical points and the housing register application would then go live.

Events after my investigation timeframe

15. After the May 2025 complaint response the Council assessed the medical evidence supplied by Mr D. In October it decided not to award any medical points.
16. As of the end of May 2026 Mr D has told me his housing register account has still not been made active and he has never been able to bid for properties.

What should have happened

Threatened with homelessness

17. 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)

18. In early 2024 the process to submit a homelessness application to the Council required the applicant complete a webform or a hard copy form at a Council office. Once received by the Council the application would be allocated to a Case Officer who would contact the applicant to assess their circumstances. A homelessness assessment document would be completed by the Officer and a decision made on what further action, if any, was required.
19. In May 2024 the process changed so that when a homelessness application was received a Triage Officer would contact the applicant and make an appointment for an assessment. An assigned Officer would then speak to the applicant and carry out the assessment.

Assessments and Personal Housing Plans

20. 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)

The prevention duty

21. 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)

The relief duty

22. 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)

The main housing duty

23. 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)

Duty to arrange interim accommodation (section 188)

24. A council must secure interim accommodation for an applicant and their household if it has reason to believe the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)

Housing register

25. A person can apply to join the Council’s housing register. The Council assesses an application to see if the applicant is eligible to join. It will then assess their level of housing need and award housing points. The Housing Officer will ask for approval from a Line Manager for any proposed points allocation. Once the points have been approved the applicant’s account becomes active and they can bid for advertised social housing.

Medical points

26. When a housing register applicant feels they have a medical need to be rehoused they can ask the Council to assess if they are eligible for medical points. The Council should send the applicant an HHD Team assessment form to complete and return along with supporting evidence from medical professionals. The Housing Officer should upload this information to the HHD Team to be assessed. The outcome of the assessment should be explained in writing to the applicant.

Was there fault by the Council

27. Mr D says the Council failed to correctly process his housing register application and that his account has never been made live since 2024. The evidence shows me there is fault by the Council in this matter. Mr D applied to join the housing register in March 2024. On 4 April the Housing Officer told Mr D he had been awarded 10 housing points, and he could start bidding for advertised social housing. That was incorrect. The Housing Officer had submitted a form to his Line Manager to get the 10 points approved, however the Line Manager failed to approve the application. This meant the points were never added to Mr D’s account and he was unable to bid. The Housing Officer repeatedly failed to take action to rectify this error. Mr D regularly contacted the Council about this point and asked for the account be made live. On 11 June the Housing Officer told Mr D the account would ‘go live today’. That was not correct and the Housing Officer took no action to get the account made active. Mr D formally complained to the Council, and it still failed to spot the error about the Line Manager not approving the housing points. This meant Mr D had to persist in asking the Council to take action. In May 2025 the Council responded to the final stage complaint and still did not identify the initial error. It said it was waiting for a decision on whether medical points should be awarded and the account would then be made active: that did not happen. Mr D has told me, as of May 2026, his account is still not active. The Council has failed for over two years to activate Mr D’s account so he can potentially bid for social housing.
28. Mr D applied to the Council for homelessness assistance in March 2024. There is very limited evidence about this part of the complaint which I consider to be indicative of the lack of action by the Council to assess the application correctly. In its response to my enquiries the Council said it was unclear if Mr D had made a homelessness application. However the evidence shows clearly in 2024 and 2025 the Council referring to a homelessness application in its contact with Mr D and I am satisfied that an application was made. The Council failed to follow the correct process on receipt of the application. I have no evidence of a homelessness assessment being conducted to determine what assistance should be provided to Mr D. I also have no evidence of the Council formally accepting a duty towards Mr D, issuing any decision letters or providing him with a personalised housing plan. Instead Mr D received piecemeal responses from the Housing Officer which would have caused confusion about what duty the Council owed to him. On 11 June the Housing Officer stated he intended to source interim accommodation for the family before the expected eviction date in July, this was despite there being no evidence of an assessment or a formal relief duty being accepted. There is no evidence also to show the Housing Officer sought interim accommodation for the family. On 22 July the Housing Officer asked for recommendations about what type of interim accommodation the family needed based on their medical evidence. Again, I have no evidence to show he followed up on this action. In August the Housing Officer further misinformed Mr D by stating he would try to get interim accommodation that week. Instead no action was taken to progress the case. I also note the Housing Officer told Mr D he would make a prevention fund application in September and I have no evidence that was ever followed up.
29. The Council also failed to assess the medical evidence Mr D supplied in May and June 2024. This was submitted to the Council for it to determine if the family were entitled to medical points on the housing register account. Mr D confirmed this was the action he was seeking in the July complaint. The Council failed to process that information. It did not send him a HHD Team assessment form to complete. As a result no action was taken to consider if Mr D was entitled to medical points in 2024. To further compound the error the Housing Officer incorrectly told the HHD Team in July he was using the medical evidence to see what interim accommodation would be suitable for the family. The fault by the Council meant there was delay of 12 months assessing the medical evidence for the purpose it was originally submitted.
30. The Council failed to ensure actions were carried out after its initial complaint response in July 2024. It also failed to identify the cause of the problem with the housing register account and rectify it: this should have been a simple matter to remedy at the time. Furthermore, the Council delayed responding to the request to escalate the complaint made on 28 June. A response was only issued on 2 May 2025 after contact from the Ombudsman. That was a delay of over nine months.

Did the fault cause an injustice

31. The failures with the handling of the homelessness application, meant Mr D never received the advice and assistance he was entitled to. He also did not receive a decision about his application and therefore had no right to seek a review if he disagreed with the decision. Mr D lost the opportunity to have his homelessness application properly considered in 2024 and 2025.
32. The fault with the housing register application meant Mr D has been unable to bid for social housing since April 2024 onwards. Mr D was subject to delay. However I do not see Mr D missed out securing a social housing property because his points level is so low (for example applicants in higher bands can have from 100 to 2000 points).
33. The poor handling of Mr D’s complaints meant he was subject to avoidable delay and did not receive an acceptable level of service.

Back to top

Action

34. To remedy the injustice caused to Mr D the Council has agreed to:

• Arrange for a Senior Officer to meet Mr D. This will allow Mr D to clarify what options he wants to pursue with his homelessness application and to discuss what will happen next with his housing register account. That meeting should be offered within four weeks of the case closing. The outcome of the meeting should be confirmed in writing to Mr D within two weeks of the meeting taking place.
• Ensure Mr D’s housing register account is made active as a priority and confirm to Mr D what his current points total is.
• Pay Mr D £400 for distress caused by the delays and failure to provide a reasonable level of service

35. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions. The redress should be paid within four weeks of this case closing.

Back to top

Decision

36. I find fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman