Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council dealt with his housing situation after his relationship with his ex-partner ended and they remained at the same property causing distress. We have ended our investigation as we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X is seeking as his current living arrangements have now been approved by the courts.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains there were failings in the way the Council dealt with his housing situation after a relationship breakdown with his ex-partner Ms Y as they both remained at the property. Mr X says he and his children suffered domestic abuse from Ms Y causing distress and impacting on their mental health. Mr X wants the Council to rehouse either himself or Ms Y.

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:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
4. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. What follows is a brief chronology of events. It does not include all the information I reviewed during the investigation.
6. Ms X and Ms Y signed a joint tenancy agreement to become Council tenants of a property in 2015.
7. An MP approached the Council in December 2023 on Mr X’s behalf as he had left the property due to the breakdown of his relationship with Ms Y. Mr X said he was involved in the care of his children so wanted the Council to find him alternative housing nearby. The Council told Mr X to approach its housing service for advice and assistance as he had not done so. The Council says Mr X did not contact housing services.
8. The Council’s social services emailed housing services in September 2024 about Mr X and Ms Y as it was completing an assessment due to allegations of domestic abuse by both parties. Ms Y alleged Mr X’s behaviour caused her to leave the family home with the children in August 2024. It noted Mr X and Ms Y had a history of splitting up but then resuming the relationship due to lack of housing. Mr X had previously tried to find his own accommodation and was unsuccessful. But they were finding they could not reside together, and this was affecting the children.
9. A social worker contacted housing services in November 2024. The officer noted Mr X and Ms Y were at the home together despite the relationship breakdown impacting on the children. The officer noted the children were settled at the home, lived near their schools and wider family so suggested a meeting to discuss and look at solutions.
10. Mr X complained to the Council in January 2025 he was a joint tenant whose relationship had broken down. Mr X asked the Council to rehouse either himself or Ms Y due to the impact onto his children as social services and the police were involved.
11. Housing and social services met in January 2025 about Mr X and Ms Y’s situation. The Council said it did not deal with relationship breakdowns so Mr X and Ms Y as parents needed to go to the family court to get an order as to whom should remain at the property with the children. The Council said it needed evidence of the alleged domestic abuse to act.
12. The Council discussed the impact onto the children and the escalating behaviour between Mr X and Ms Y. It said one parent should work with a refuge for accommodation and make a homelessness application. Housing services would support with this and refer it to the social welfare panel.
13. The Council responded to Mr X’ s complaint in February 2025 and advised him to contact his Resident Services Officer (RSO) who would assist him further to explore his rehousing options, look at the conditions of tenancy and provide advice.
14. Mr X complained he been in contact with RSO numerous times in the last few years with no satisfactory solution. Mr X said he was the main carer for his children while living in a toxic atmosphere as Ms Y still lived at the property. Ms Y had exclusive use of the front room leaving Mr X and the children to live in the bedrooms. Mr X asked the Council to rehouse either him or Ms Y. Or to require Ms Y to sign the tenancy over to him or the Council to grant him an occupation order.
15. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint in March 2025 and advised on his situation as a joint tenant. The Council confirmed the RSO had spoken to Mr X numerous times and advised that as it was a relationship breakdown he needed to go to family court and seek advice from the CAB.
16. The Council confirms a social worker from the Family Support Team provides support to Mr X ‘s children. And there is a plan in place including the social worker visiting every two weeks to see them with regular meetings with parents and professionals supporting the family.
17. The Council confirms the accuracy of Mr X’s physical description of the living situation with both Mr X and Ms Y making allegations of domestic abuse about each other. The Council considered the negative impact on the children. But has concluded there is not enough evidence to confirm the children are subject to domestic abuse although they are living in a hostile environment.
18. It has discussed with Mr X, Ms Y and a social worker the legal route each can follow within private proceedings such as applying for an occupation order and a non-molestation order. The Council will respond accordingly to any report the courts request to determine where children should live, with whom and what contact would look like for the non-resident parent.
19. Since Mr X’s complaint to us he and Ms Y have attended a court hearing where the judge granted an interim occupation of the property for them both to live there with their children subject to conditions and use of certain rooms. There will then be further court hearings.

My assessment

20. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended). Mr X is a Council tenant. So, I have not considered Mr X’s concerns about how the Council dealt with the joint tenancy or any advice given. This is because the Council was acting as a social landlord in these matters so any issues about this are outside our jurisdiction to investigate.
21. Therefore, my investigation focussed on Mr X’s approach to the Council as potentially homeless, advice given about applying to the housing register, the welfare of Mr X’s children and impact of the alleged domestic abuse onto them.
22. However, events have moved on since Mr X’s complaint to us with the occupation of the property considered at a court hearing. And a judge has granted an interim order to enable both Mr X and Ms Y to live at the property with their children subject to certain conditions. As this has now been ratified by the courts there are no grounds for us to continue to investigate Mr X’s complaints. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X was seeking as his living arrangements have been approved by the courts. While I appreciate Mr X may be disappointed and wish us to continue to investigate his approaches to the Council there is no worthwhile outcome we can achieve as we cannot change or add anything to the court decision that has been made which has judged Mr X and Ms Y can live at the same accommodation.

Back to top

Decision

23. I am ending my investigation into the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman