Homelessness


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Redbridge (18 005 838)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 16-Jan-2019

    Summary: Ms X complains about how the Council dealt with her suitability review request. Ms X says the Council did not complete one within the required statutory timescales. She says this caused her an injustice because she had to stay in accommodation she felt was unsuitable and the disrepair issues caused damage to her belongings. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for failing to complete the suitability review. We recommend the Council pay Ms X £1350.

  • Thurrock Council (18 007 255)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 15-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained about how the Council handled their homelessness and housing register applications. The Council was not at fault for not providing them with interim accommodation as it did not have a duty to do so. The Council was at fault as it delayed making decisions on Mr and Mrs X's housing register applications and it did not issue a decision letter when it ended its duty to relieve them of their homelessness. However, these faults did not cause them an injustice. The Council was at fault when it did not keep an appointment it booked with Mr and Mrs X. Mr and Mrs X went to extra time and trouble in visiting the Council's offices more times than necessary, causing them stress and inconvenience. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay Mr and Mrs X £150 to recognise this.

  • London Borough of Waltham Forest (18 007 179)

    Statement Not upheld Homelessness 14-Jan-2019

    Summary: there was no fault in the way the Council considered Mr X's homelessness application and his need for interim accommodation.

  • London Borough of Camden (18 010 453)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 14-Jan-2019

    Summary: Ms D says the Council delayed progressing her housing and medical assessments in a timely manner. The Ombudsman has found some evidence of fault. He has completed the investigation and upheld the complaint. The Council has agreed to our recommended actions including an apology to Ms D.

  • London Borough of Ealing (18 003 644)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 09-Jan-2019

    Summary: Miss B complained that the Council evicted her from her emergency accommodation when she was pregnant in 2015. We consider the Council was at fault in the way it made the decision and delayed in carrying out the review. It did not extend Miss B's accommodation and lost contact with her, causing her significant distress at a difficult time. The Council has agreed to pay her £500 and improve its procedures.

  • Birmingham City Council (18 003 220)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 07-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mrs B complains about the Council's handling of her homeless and housing applications during 2017 and 2018. The Ombudsman has found some instances of fault by the Council. He has completed the investigation and upheld the complaint because the Council agrees to take action.

  • Scarborough Borough Council (18 007 712)

    Statement Not upheld Homelessness 07-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr F complains the Council placed him in unsuitable interim accommodation when he applied as homeless. The Ombudsman has found no fault by the Council.

  • Kettering Borough Council (18 004 478)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 03-Jan-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman found fault on Miss T's complaint against the Council about the way it dealt with her homeless application. It delayed processing it for about 5 weeks. It also failed to properly consider her for interim accommodation before deciding her application. The Council agreed to send Miss T an apology, pay her £300 for the distress caused, and remind officers about the need to make and retain proper records.

  • London Borough of Hillingdon (18 009 807)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 02-Jan-2019

    Summary: Ms X complains the Council told her to make a homelessness application to another council when she had to leave her home due to domestic violence. She says it did not offer her interim accommodation in its area despite her saying she wished to stay there. The Council has not demonstrated it properly considered whether Ms X could be housed in its area but this did not cause an injustice to Ms X because there was no interim accommodation available in the area at the time. The Council has taken a homelessness application and has decided Ms X is not homeless.

  • London Borough of Haringey (18 004 237)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 18-Dec-2018

    Summary: The Council provided Ms X with adequate housing support in line with statutory guidance. It also appropriately responded to her repair complaints. But it took too long to complete a review of her homelessness decision. The Ombudsman cannot assess the full extent of the injustice from this fault until after the outcome of any appeal to the County Court.

;