Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to provide suitable and timely homelessness support to Miss X. It was also at fault for its poor communication and delayed complaint responses. The Council will apologise and make a symbolic payment to Miss X to acknowledge the avoidable distress and frustration caused by its faults.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council failed to provide appropriate and timely homelessness support when she was pregnant and at risk of domestic abuse. She complained that the Council’s communication was poor and lacked empathy. She said it also did not respond to her complaints in a timely manner.
2. Miss X also complained that the Council delayed providing her with social housing on her housing register application.
3. Miss X said as a result her mental health worsened.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
6. 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

7. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

8. I have not investigated Miss X’s complaint at paragraph 2) above. The Council has provided Miss X with social housing since she first complained to us therefore there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I spoke to Miss X about her complaint and considered the evidence she provided.
10. I also considered the Council’s response to our initial enquiries as well as the relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. Miss 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

Relevant law and guidance

Homelessness

12. 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.
13. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
14. It is not reasonable for a person to continue to live in accommodation if it is probable this will lead to violence or domestic abuse against them. (Housing Act 1996, Section 177)

Assessing homelessness and domestic abuse

15. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness.
16. The Council should try to get an account of the applicant’s experience to assess whether the behaviour they have experienced is abusive or whether they would be at risk of domestic abuse if they continued to occupy their accommodation. The authority should support the victim to outline their experience and make an assessment based on the details of the case. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, Chapter 21)
17. With consent of the victim, the Council may wish to speak to other agencies who are informed about the domestic abuse, for instance, the police, children’s services, or health professionals. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, Chapter 21)
18. If the applicant’s experience has been documented already by a domestic abuse service – where possible – councils should utilise existing statements to avoid asking the victim to re-live their experience unnecessarily. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, Chapter 21)

Duty to provide interim accommodation

19. A council must provide interim accommodation while it makes enquiries into a homeless application if it has “reason to believe” that the applicant may be:

• Homeless
• Eligible for assistance
• In priority need. Examples of applicants with Priority need include pregnant women and victims of domestic abuse.

20. The Homelessness Code of Guidance states that the 'reason to believe' evidential threshold for providing interim accommodation is low and the duty to provide interim accommodation arises before the Council makes its full enquiries.

The Council’s complaints policy

21. The Council uses a two-stage process to look at corporate complaints:

• Stage one: Complaints are acknowledged within two working days and a full written reply is sent within fifteen working days.
• Stage two: Complaints are acknowledged within two working days and a full written reply is sent within twenty working days.

What happened

22. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
23. In late August 2024 Miss X contacted the Council for homelessness support. Mrs X told the Council she was pregnant and at risk of domestic abuse from her ex-partner. She provided the Council with a crime reference number and said she was being supported by a domestic abuse charity.
24. A Council officer (officer A) contacted Miss X. Miss X said officer A was rude, lacked empathy and was dismissive of the domestic abuse concerns. Miss X also said officer A asked her to consider private rental properties and told her they would call back the next day. Miss X said officer A did not call back.
25. Miss X said she felt vulnerable and “hopeless” about her situation following her interaction with the Council. In early September 2024 she complained to the Council about this experience. The Council acknowledged her complaint and said it would reply within 10 days. An internal email to the Council’s Housing Needs team requested that the team followed up with Miss X who was a pregnant mother and a victim of domestic abuse who was looking to move to another property.
26. In late December 2024 Miss X received a call from officer A. She said officer A asked if she still needed homelessness support, to which Miss X said no. Miss X said officer A asked her to email them without explaining why.
27. A copy of the email from Miss X to officer A stated that she was no longer at risk of domestic violence and that she would stay on the housing register until she got an offer. Miss X believes her email was used to close her complaint about the experience she had when she sought homelessness support. She said she received no response to her September 2024 complaint.
28. In September 2025, Miss X submitted a new complaint about the Council’s actions and its failure to respond to her previous complaint.
29. The Council issued a stage one response in September 2025. In it, the Council:

• said officer A recorded that Miss X was no longer threatened with homelessness following their contact in December 2024. The Council said it had drafted a complaint response in late December 2024 but had failed to send it to her.
• acknowledged there had been a delay of four months between Miss X’s initial contact and when the Council reached out to her in December. It apologised for this and said it had implemented measures to improve its service and that applicants were now contacted within two days following a referral to the service.
• explained officer A was trying to ensure Miss X had the correct email address but it acknowledged that “there were more effective ways to achieve this.” It added that it had no evidence to determine what officer A had said to Miss X during the initial assessment. The Council said that it had taken steps to ensure all officers undertook a refresher course for domestic abuse awareness.
• accepted it had failed to send Miss X a response to her previous complaint.

30. Miss X remained unhappy and asked to go to the next stage of the complaints procedure. In October 2025 the Council issued a stage two complaint response. In it the Council:

• recognised its handling of Miss X’s case caused her significant distress at a vulnerable time. It said it had no direct evidence of officer A’s precise wording or tone used with Miss X and it could not conclude deliberate unfairness or misconduct but it accepted that Miss X felt its response did not feel empathetic to her as a victim of domestic abuse and that officer A did not follow up with Miss X as promised.
• said it failed to progress her September 2024 complaint properly and that it should not have closed her complaint in December 2024 without her confirmation.
• explained Miss X was asked to send a short “test” email by officer A which was interpreted as confirmation that she did not wish to pursue a homelessness application. The Council said there was no intentional misuse but the process used by officer A was procedurally inappropriate and caused confusion. It said officer A should have explained the purpose of the email clearly.
• outlined steps it had taken to put things right which included refresher training for domestic abuse awareness and trauma-informed practice for all housing needs officers and reinforcement of its complaints closure protocol.
• apologised to Miss X and offered a payment of £200 in recognition of the confusion, distress and time spent pursuing the matter.

31. Unhappy with the outcome, Miss X complained to us.

Analysis

32. The Council had a duty to carry out a proper and timely assessment of Miss X’s circumstances to determine if it owed her any homelessness duty when she contacted it for homelessness support in late August/early September 2024. It did not do so which was fault. It failed to take a homelessness application and to properly consider whether she was at risk of or homeless. Miss X says she was signposted towards private rented accommodation rather than provided with appropriate support to address her potential homelessness.
33. By the time the Council contacted Miss X four months later she no longer needed homelessness support. I cannot say, even on the balance of probabilities, what the Council would have decided if it had acted sooner and without fault, whether it would have decided it had reason to believe Miss X was homeless and whether she would have accepted an offer of interim accommodation. However, the Council’s fault caused Miss X avoidable distress and uncertainty.
34. The Council has already accepted that its communication and complaint handling processes fell short of its standards which was fault that caused Miss X avoidable frustration. In its complaint response it said officers had received refresher training on domestic abuse awareness and trauma-informed practice which should help prevent a recurrence of some of the faults identified in this case.

Back to top

Actions

35. Within one month of this decision the Council will:
1. Apologise and pay Miss X £500 for the avoidable uncertainty, frustration and distress caused by its poor communication and failure to take timely and appropriate action in relation to her request for homelessness support. This is inclusive of the £200 the Council has already offered. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council will consider this guidance in making the apology.
36. Within two months of this decision the Council will:
1. Either through training or a briefing note, ensure its housing officers are made aware of their duties in line with Homelessness code of guidance when dealing with victims of domestic abuse.
37. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

38. I found fault causing injustice and the Council agreed actions to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman