Summary: Mr B complains about how the Council has handled his housing situation from when he was homeless in January 2018 and generally how it has treated him since then. There was fault in the Council’s correspondence with Mr B about his arrears but that has not caused significant injustice to Mr B.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains about how the Council has handled his housing situation from when he was homeless in January 2018 and generally how it has treated him since then. He considers the Council’s actions have increased the stress he was under and has meant he has spent longer living in unsatisfactory temporary accommodation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the complaint and spoke to Mr B. I asked the Council to comment on the complaint and provide information. I sent a draft of this statement to Mr B and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of events

6. Mr B approached the Council in January 2018 as he had been evicted from the property where he had been living. The Council provided him with interim accommodation while it considered what duties it had to him under homelessness law.
7. Mr B complained about how he was treated by officers at that first meeting. The Council responded at all three stages of its complaints process between March and June 2018.
8. In June 2018 the Council accepted it had the full housing duty to Mr B. It wrote to him explaining what this meant. Over the summer Mr B asked for telephone contact from his housing officer. The Council offered to meet with Mr B.
9. In late July Mr B complained to the Ombudsman. In his correspondence he referred to other matters which had not been considered by the Council so we referred those back for the Council. The Council responded to Mr B’s new complaints in October and he replied asking for the complaint to be escalated to the next stage.
10. There then followed correspondence between our office, the Council and Mr B. At one point Mr B said he did not want a response from the Council, he just wanted to speak to his housing officer. In February 2019 Mr B was clear he did want to pursue his complaint. The Council considered it needed clarification from Mr B on what the outstanding issues now were. Mr B was clear in correspondence he provided in April and the Council agreed to carry out a stage two investigation. That response was provided in September. Mr B was not happy with the response and asked for consideration at stage three. That was sent at the beginning of October.
11. Throughout this time Mr B has remained living in the same temporary B&B accommodation that was provided at the outset. There is a service charge for the property and Mr B has substantial arrears as he has not paid the service charge.
12. The Council contacted Mr B about offering him a flat February 2019. An officer telephoned Mr B about the accommodation but Mr B did not want to consider it.

Analysis of the key issues

Initial approach in 2018

13. Mr B was very concerned about the conduct of Council officers when he first approached the Council in 2018. He also reported that there had been some inappropriate behaviour from officers when they had seen him outside of the Council premises in a shopping centre.
14. The Council has responded to these points in its complaint responses. I recognise how very unhappy Mr B is on these points but I do not consider I can achieve anything more. Officers have apologised if Mr B felt their behaviour or presentation was disrespectful or dismissive but have been clear that was not their intention.
15. I do not consider that further investigation will provide any more useful information or meaningful outcome. There will remain a difference of view between Mr B and the officers concerned but I do not consider I can resolve that.
16. The Council fulfilled its duties to Mr B by providing interim accommodation. This was because it had reason to believe he may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. When it completed its enquiries if accepted it had had the main homelessness duty to him. It has met this duty by arranging the temporary accommodation where he is living until it makes a suitable offer of social housing or private rented accommodation.
17. If Mr B considers that the accommodation where he is living is unsuitable then he can request a review by the Council.

Service charge

18. Mr B was liable for a service charge when he moved into the property. The Council explained about the service charge in a letter to him. Mr B made only one payment. The Council wrote to him over 2018 explaining that his arrears were increasing and that it put his tenancy at risk. In October 2019 the Council wrote to Mr B saying his application to the housing register had been suspended because of his arrears.
19. It is now clear that in fact Mr B had not applied to the Council’s housing register as he does not want to be rehoused in the Council’s area. The information the Council has provided about this was incorrect. And the information calls into question the way it handles arrears. The Council said it intends to review the process and standard letters used.
20. There is no question Mr B is aware of the arrears and that the arrears are due because he has not paid the sum due. But if the Council intended to evict Mr B because of arrears it should ensure it follows the proper process so Mr B understands the consequences of his failure to pay the arrears.

Housing options

21. Mr B has repeatedly said he wants to speak to his housing officer. The Council has made offers for Mr B to come in to speak to an officer but Mr B has declined those offers.
22. I consider the key point here is that Mr B wants support in finding alternative accommodation, preferably outside of the Council’s area. The Council wrote to Mr B on 10 October 2018. That letter set out what options were available to Mr B which included contact details for an officer and that the Council could help with pre-tenancy costs. It also offered to nominate Mr B to an agency which could help with finding accommodation. The officer contacted Mr B over the end of 2018 but he did not want to pursue contact at that time.
23. Mr B resumed contact in February 2019 both with the Council and with the Ombudsman. That resulted in the escalation of his complaint. There was further contact between the officer and Mr B in October and November 2019. In summary Mr B was repeating that he wants to know what help the Council can give to him to find his own accommodation. The officer responded offering a meeting which Mr B declined and also providing a copy of the response from October 2018 which explained what options were open to Mr B.
24. I do not consider the Council has been at fault in the information it has given to Mr B. It has explained what action he can take and where it can provide support. It may be that this is less than Mr B would like but there is not fault in what the Council has done.

Entering Mr B’s room at the B&B

25. Mr B complained that someone, who he believed to be an officer of the Council, had entered his room. The Council said that wasn’t the case and that although they had powers to do so they would only do so in cases where it was suspected that someone wasn’t occupying the room. And that they would normally give notice.
26. In responding to Mr B’s complaint the Council then said that in fact officers had entered his room. The Council has now clarified that officers had entered his room but that was in relation to the previous tenant and was before Mr B moved in.
27. It was unfortunate that the Council’s response provided incorrect information on this point but I do not consider it to be of such significance that it warrants any further action. The information the Council has now provided supports that the visit was not while Mr B has occupied the room.

The offer

28. In February 2019 an officer telephoned Mr B to invite him to view a flat. Mr B declined to go as he did not consider the accommodation would be suitable as it was effectively hostel.
29. The Council did not treat this as Mr B refusing an offer of accommodation and seek to end its duties to him. It took no further action. I do not, therefore, consider this to be a significant point as the situation remains that the Council owes the full housing duty to Mr B.
30. In this case the letter that would have advised Mr B of the consequences of not accepting the offer was not sent to him. When the Council makes a further offer to Mr B it should ensure that it informs him, in writing, of the consequences of not accepting it and his appeal rights if he does accept it but does not consider it to be suitable.

Agreed action

31. The Council will review its process for handling arrears for service charges for temporary accommodation and tell the Ombudsman of the outcome within the two months of the date of the final decision on this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

32. There was fault in the Council’s correspondence with Mr B about his arrears but that has not caused significant injustice to Mr B.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman