Summary: Mr X complained the Council made him an offer of unsuitable temporary and permanent accommodation and prevented him from bidding for permanent accommodation for several months. We found fault by the Council on all matters. This caused Mr X uncertainty, frustration and distress. We recommend the Council apologise to Mr X and make him a payment in recognition of the injustice caused to him.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council made him offers of unsuitable temporary and permanent accommodation. He also complained that he was prevented from bidding for permanent accommodation for five months. Mr X stated the Council has acted maliciously towards him.
2. Mr X stated the Council’s actions have caused him and his family distress, uncertainty and frustration. He also stated its actions have negatively impacted his mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)
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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. The Ombudsman normally expects a person to complain to us within 12 months of knowing something has happened which affects them. Mr X’s complaint includes events dating back to 2020. I have decided to exercise discretion and investigate matters from 2024 onwards. This is because Mr X has been pursuing this matter with Council continuously from this date.
7. I have not exercised discretion to investigate matters that happened before 2024. This is because I consider it was reasonable to expect Mr X to have approached us about these matters sooner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. 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

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.

The prevention duty

11. If a council is satisfied an applicant is threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, it must take steps to help the applicant keep their home or find somewhere new to live. In deciding what steps to take, a council must have regard to its assessment of the applicant’s case. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

The relief duty

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)

The main housing duty

13. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to make accommodation available (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)

Review rights

14. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions:

• their eligibility for assistance;
• what duty (if any) is owed to them if they are found to be homeless or threatened with homelessness;
• the steps they are to take in their personalised housing plan at the prevention duty stage;
• giving notice to bring the prevention duty to an end;
• the steps they are to take in their personalised housing plan at the relief duty stage;
• giving notice to bring the relief duty to an end;
• giving notice in cases of deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate;
• to notify their case to another authority when the Council considers the conditions for referral are met;
• whether the conditions are met for the referral of their case to another housing authority;
• the conditions for referral to another authority are not met so the notifying housing authority owes the main housing duty;
• 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.

Review procedure

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)

Review timescale and right of appeal

16. Councils must complete reviews of the following decisions within three weeks of either the date of the review request or the date they receive written representations:

• on the steps they are to take in the personal housing plan at the prevention or relief duty stage; or
• notice being given of deliberate and unreasonable refusal to cooperate and the effect of the notice is to bring the prevention duty to an end.

17. 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.

18. These periods can be extended if the applicant agrees in writing.
19. 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)

Suitability of accommodation

20. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household. This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
21. Homelessness temporary accommodation must be legally suitable. (Housing Act 1996, section 206) Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability. (Housing Act 1996, section 202) If the Council’s review decides the accommodation is unsuitable, the Council must provide suitable accommodation. If the review decides the accommodation is suitable, the applicant has the right to appeal to the county court on a point of law. (Housing Act 1996, section 204)
22. Councils must consider the location of accommodation when they consider if it is suitable for the applicant and members of their household. If a council places an applicant outside its district, it must consider, among other matters:

• the distance of the accommodation from the “home” district;
• the significance of any disruption to the education of members of the applicant’s household; and
• the proximity and accessibility to local services, amenities and transport. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2012)

Key events

23. What follows is a summary of the key events. It is not intended to show everything that happened.
24. Mr X lived in privately rented accommodation with his eldest daughter.
25. Following an incident at Mr X’s home in 2020, it was decided it was not safe for him to continue living there. Mr X approached the Council as homeless and made a homelessness application.
26. In October 2020 the Council provided Mr X with interim accommodation at Property 1. The property was a two-bedroom ground floor flat located within in the Council’s boundaries and in an area that was considered safe for him to live.
27. In November the Council decided Mr X’s homelessness application. It found Mr X was homeless and eligible for assistance but not in priority need.
28. Mr X disagreed with the decision and requested a review. The Council upheld its original decision and Mr X appealed to the County Court.
29. In May 2021 the Council settled Mr X’s appeal to the County Court by offering to carry out a fresh review of its decision on his homelessness application.
30. In March 2022 the Council completed the review and found Mr X was homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need. It accepted the main housing duty to him. Mr X remained in Property 1, which now became temporary accommodation.
31. In summer 2022 Mr X appointed a legal representative to request a suitability review of Property 1. Mr X’s legal representative later withdrew the request and said Mr X wanted to request a review of his housing register priority banding.
32. In January 2024 the Council completed the review of Mr X’s housing register application including supporting medical information provided by him. It placed Mr X’s application in priority band B in recognition of his medical needs and the needs of his daughter.
33. In June and July, the Council completed Housing Needs Assessments for Mr X. The assessments identified areas within the Council’s boundaries where it would be unsafe for Mr X to live.
34. On 24 July the Council made Mr X a direct offer of permanent accommodation. However, Mr X raised concerns that the property was in an area where it was not safe for him to live. The Council said it would consider the suitability of the offer. Mr X was unable to bid for permanent accommodation while it did so.
35. In November the Council wrote to Mr X withdrawing the direct offer of permanent accommodation. The Council said it would contact him about another offer, but it did not do so. Mr X was able to bid for permanent accommodation from 27 October onwards.
36. In December Mr X told the Council Property 1 was being repossessed because his landlord had failed pay the mortgage. He asked the Council to arrange alternative temporary accommodation for him, but he did not receive a reply.
37. In July 2025 the Council made Mr X an urgent offer of alternative temporary accommodation. However, the accommodation was in an area that was unsafe for Mr X to live in. Mr X told the Council, but it said it would consider him to be intentionally homeless if he refused the accommodation. Mr X contacted the Police who intervened on his behalf and the Council withdrew the offer. Mr X continued to live in Property 1 while repossession proceedings continued.
38. Also, in July the Council received an email from the Police confirming the areas within its borough where it would be unsafe for Mr X to live. The email said Mr X should be housed outside of the borough if he could not be moved to a safe area within it.
39. Unhappy with the Council’s offer of accommodation Mr X complained to the Council at stage one and two of its complaints process. The Council replies stated:
• the offer of alternative temporary accommodation made in June 2025 was unsuitable for Mr X due to a risk of violence. The offer was withdrawn.
• the Council will make Mr X an alternative offer of temporary accommodation outside of the borough to safeguard himself and his children.
• it was sorry of the inconvenience caused to Mr X.
40. In February 2026 the Council completed a new Housing Needs Assessment for Mr X. The assessment did not note any significant changes in his circumstances.
41. Also, in February Mr X was evicted from Property 1 as possession proceedings against his landlord concluded. Mr X and his family were provided with hotel accommodation for three nights in another area of London. The Council then provided Mr X and his family with alternative temporary accommodation at Property 2. The property is in an area within the Council’s boundaries, but which is safe for Mr X and near his daughter’s school.
42. Since moving into Property 2 Mr X has raised concerns about the suitability of the property and in May he requested a suitability review.
43. Meanwhile Mr X complained to the Ombudsman. We made enquires of the Council. It told us:
• the direct offer of permanent accommodation made to Mr X in July 2024 was made to discharge its main housing duty to Mr X and to secure settled accommodation for him and his family. It did not make him another direct offer of permanent accommodation.
• it cannot retrospectively verify if Mr X was unable to bid for permanent accommodation during the period 24 July 2024 to November 2024, when it decided the direct offer of accommodation was not suitable.
• it provided a copy of Mr X’s bidding history which showed he did not place any bids between 24 July 2024 and 27 October 2024. The bidding history shows Mr X has not placed highly for any property he has bid on since July 2024.
• it has taken steps to ensure Mr X is accommodated in areas where he is not at risk. It has liaised with the Police to identify areas of risk to Mr X, and he has not been housed in an area which is unsafe for him.
• it did not conclude that all areas of the borough were unsafe for Mr X. The Housing Needs Assessments for Mr X show which areas are unsafe and it sought to avoid placing Mr X in unsafe areas and considered moving him out of the borough if it could not find accommodation in safe areas within it.
• it considered the need for Mr X’s daughter to be near her school, especially as she is now in her GCSE year. Property 2 is located within the borough boundaries and within in a reasonable proximity to her school.
• it denies there has been any malicious intent in how it had handled Mr X’s case.

Finding

Temporary accommodation

44. In June 2025 the Council made Mr X an offer of alternative accommodation. The property was in an area that was unsafe for Mr X. This is fault by the Council as it was aware from Housing Needs Assessments for Mr X, which areas would be unsafe for him. The offer caused Mr X distress that he may be moved to unsafe area. This is injustice.
45. Mr X remained in Property 1 following the unsuitable offer of alternative temporary accommodation. Once Property 1 was repossessed Mr X had to stay in hotel accommodation for three nights while alternative temporary accommodation was found. This undoubtedly caused Mr X distress. This is injustice.
46. In its response to Mr X’s complaint the Council said it would only be safe to offer Mr X temporary accommodation outside of its borough. This is not supported by the information it received from the Police. This is fault by the Council which caused Mr X frustration and distress that he may be moved further away from his daughter’s school.
47. Mr X has raised concerns about the suitability of property 2 and requested a review. This is the appropriate course of action for Mr X to take. The Council should act on his request in accordance with the relevant legislation, as set out in paragraph 21.

Direct offer of permanent accommodation

48. The Council made Mr X a direct offer of permanent accommodation in July 2024. It said it did so to discharge the Council’s housing duty to Mr X. However, the Council’s Allocations Policy says it will only make direct offers in exceptional circumstances or where it is advantageous to the Council. In its reply to our enquiries the Council provided Mr X’s case notes. There is no record in the case notes of the reasons why the Council decided to make Mr X a direct offer of accommodation. The Council should clearly record it reasons for making such offers and its failure to do so amounts to fault.
49. The Council’s direct offer of accommodation to Mr X was in an area that was unsafe for him to live in. The Council had identified areas that were unsafe for Mr X as part of the Housing Needs Assessments it completed for him prior to it making the offer to him. I consider it is at fault for making Mr X a direct offer of accommodation in an unsafe area. The offer of unsuitable accommodation caused Mr X distress and frustration. This is injustice.
50. The Council did not make Mr X another direct offer of accommodation once it withdrew its original offer. As there is no record of the reasons why the Council decided to make Mr X a direct offer, I cannot be certain whether it was appropriate for the Council to have made him another direct offer of permanent accommodation. The uncertainty caused to Mr X is injustice.
51. Between 24 July 2024 and 27 October 2024 Mr X was unable to place bids for permanent accommodation. As a result, Mr X may have been prevented from bidding on suitable permanent accommodation. This is injustice.

Maliciousness

52. Mr X stated the Council has acted maliciously towards him. While I have found evidence of fault in its handling of his housing case, I have not found evidence to suggested it acted maliciously towards him.

Agreed Action

53. To remedy the injustice caused to Mr X, the Council will within one month of my final decision:
• Apologise to Mr X for the fault identified in paragraphs 45-52. The apology written should be in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies on making an effective apology.
• Pay Mr X £500 in recognition of the distress and uncertainty caused to him because of the Council making him offers of accommodation in areas that are unsafe for him and incorrectly saying it could only offer him accommodation outside of its area.
• Check its records to see if Mr X would have been the first-place bidder on any properties it offered between 24 July 2024 and 27 October 2024, that he was eligible to bid for and would have meet his needs If the Council finds Mr X would have been offered a suitable property it should agree to make him a direct offer of the next suitable property that becomes available.
• Consider if Mr X’s case is exceptional enough for it to make him another direct offer of permanent accommodation (if it does not find Mr X missed out on the opportunity to successfully bid for accommodation between 24 July 2024 and 27 October 2024) and to record the reasons for its decision. It should also notify Mr X in writing of its decision.
54. The Council will send its homelessness officers a guidance note reminding them to record the reasons why a direct offer of accommodation is considered appropriate. The Council will send its staff the guidance note within one month of my final decision.
55. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

56. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice the caused to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman