Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application because there is insufficient evidence of fault. The Council has offered an appropriate payment for its delay in issuing a housing register decision and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council did not support her when she was homeless, so she was forced to accept private rented accommodation. She also said it carried out a medical assessment but failed to issue its decision for a year, which meant she had to remain in unsuitable private rented sector accommodation.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. We usually expect people to complain to us within 12 months of the events complained about. However, there was a long delay in the Council issuing its housing register decision, so I have decided we should consider the complaint.

Homelessness application

6. Ms X made a homelessness application in July 2024, and the Council accepted a relief duty. It made a referral to its independent medical adviser (IMA) for advice about whether Ms X was in priority need. The IMA concluded she was no more vulnerable than the ordinary person. The Council told Ms X by telephone it did not consider she was in priority need.
7. In August, Ms X told the Council she had found a suitable private rented sector (PRS) property and asked it to provide financial assistance to secure it. The Council did so and Ms X signed a 24 month tenancy in mid-August. The Council ended its relief duty because Ms X was suitably rehoused.
8. Councils can discharge a homelessness duty by assisting an applicant to find a PRS property. There is no evidence the Council failed to assist Ms X or forced her into accepting a PRS property. Although Ms X asked for a copy of the IMA advice, this was no longer relevant because she had been rehoused. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

Housing register application

9. Ms X made a housing register application in April 2024. The Council carried out a medical assessment to decide whether she qualified to join its housing register. It appears this was concluded in late July 2024, but the Council did not issue a decision in writing until 2 July 2025. Its decision said Ms X did not qualify to join the housing register because she had no housing need and did not meet the criteria for medical priority. It also said Ms X could ask for a review of the decision if she disagreed with it and it was reasonable for Ms X to do so.
10. In its complaint response, the Council accepted this delay was fault. It apologised and offered to pay Ms X £150 to remedy the injustice caused. I consider this payment was sufficient to remedy the delayed review rights and that further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
11. If Ms X had asked for a review, and the Council had changed its decision, I would have expected it to back-date the application to the date it should have made its initial decision, which would have remedied the delay in making it.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in relation to the homelessness application and the Council has already remedied the injustice caused by its delay in issuing a housing register decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman