Summary: Ms B complains about the Council’s handling of her request for housing help when she was threatened with homelessness. The Council was at fault. The Council did not give proper consideration to Ms B’s homelessness application and delayed increasing her housing register priority. This meant Ms B missed out on suitable properties. The Council has agreed to take a range of actions to put right the injustice Ms B suffered. We have completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Ms B, complains about the Council’s handling of her request for housing help made when she was threatened with homelessness in June 2018. Ms B says the Council:
• Provided inconsistent information about what she needed to do to arrange a homelessness appointment and did not arrange an appointment for her until October 2018, after she had put in a complaint.
• Did not accept a homelessness application at the appointment in October 2018 and did not contact her again after she sent documents the officer requested.
• Delayed responding to her complaint about the matter.
• Told her on 5 February 2019, after her housing situation became more urgent, that it could place her housing application in Band B (for homelessness prevention) if she was able to continue to stay with friends and relatives, rather than move her into temporary accommodation which would mean she would stay in Band C. But, the Council did not place her application in Band B until late February 2019.
• Has wrongly not backdated her Band B award to 2010 which is when she joined the housing register.
2. Ms B also complains that the Council:
• Should have placed her housing application in Band B in 2010 when she joined the housing register because her housing situation was the same as her current circumstances.
• Should have taken a homelessness application from her in 2010.
3. Ms B says the Council’s mishandling of her request for housing help has affected her health, studies and job prospects. Ms B also says it has placed stress on the relatives and friends she has been staying with.

Back to top

What I have investigated

4. I have investigated the complaints summarised in the first five bullet points above.
5. Ms B’s complaints about the Council’s actions in February 2019 have not completed the Council’s complaints procedure. But, I have exercised our discretion to investigate these complaints now. This is because I have investigated Ms B’s complaint about the Council’s actions leading up to what happened in February 2019, and I do not consider it would be helpful to expect Ms B to make a separate complaint about this related matter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

6. 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)
7. 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

8. I have considered Ms B’s complaint and the supporting information she sent. I have made enquiries to the Council and have considered the information provided by the Council in response. I have also shared a draft version of this statement with Ms B and the Council, and have considered the comments I received in response.

Back to top

What I found

Legal background

The law on homelessness

9. 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.
10. When a person applies to a council for accommodation and it has reason to believe they may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, a number of duties arise, including:
• to make enquiries;
• to secure suitable accommodation for certain applicants pending the outcome of the enquiries;
• to notify the applicant of the decision in writing and the right to request a review of the decision.
11. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking from assistance from the Council on or after 3 April 2018, he or she is likely to become homeless within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4))
12. Councils can suggest alternative solutions in cases of potential homelessness where these would be suitable and acceptable to the applicant. However councils must not do this to avoid their legal duties, especially the duty to make inquiries into the applicant’s homelessness.
13. The Ombudsman has criticised councils for ‘gatekeeping’ practices, for example, failing to take a homelessness application at the earliest opportunity. (Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities, paragraphs 2.3 and 6.4)
14. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance says, rather than advise the applicant to return when homelessness is more imminent, the housing authority may wish to accept a prevention duty and begin to take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)
15. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help them to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. This is called the Prevention duty. In deciding what steps they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
16. Councils must take reasonable steps to secure accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This is called the Relief duty. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
17. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation (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)

The Council’s housing allocations scheme

18. The Council’s housing allocations scheme sets out the criteria for an award of Band B priority. It says:

Band B consists of applicants with high priority, including applicants having an “additional preference” under Section 166A(3) of the Housing Act 1996.

This includes:

• Households who are severely overcrowded (lacking two bedrooms or more compared to their allowed property size)
• Households with an urgent medical or welfare need to move as assessed by the Council’s Medical Adviser (see section on Medical Need),
• Households threatened with homelessness who would if they became homeless be owed a full housing duty under Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996, but who are working with the Council to prevent themselves from becoming homeless.
• Households to whom the council previously owed a full housing duty under Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 but who have voluntarily agreed to this duty being brought to an end by the provision of private rented accommodation.
• Other groups specified by the Secretary of State as being people who should be afforded “additional preference” under Section 166A(3) of the Housing Act 1996 (see Armed Forces Personnel).

What happened

19. Ms B joined the Council’s housing register in 2010. Until recently Ms B’s housing application was in Band C. Ms B suffers from several health conditions and has been the victim of violence.
20. Recently Ms B has been ‘sofa surfing’ staying with friends and relatives for short periods at a time. Ms B contacted the Council in June 2018 because she was at risk of homelessness. Ms B says Council officers told her she needed to complete a form on the Council website to ask for an appointment to make a homelessness application. Ms B did this and received an acknowledgement but she did not hear back.
21. In August Ms B contacted the Council again and was told to send an email because there was a backlog. Ms B did this but her email bounced back.
22. Ms B then went to the Council office again and was told the Council no longer does online bookings, and she needed to attend on a Tuesday morning before 9am.
23. On 7 September Ms B put in a complaint to the Council about the inconsistent information she had been told and the Council’s failure to arrange an appointment. The Council said it would respond by 5 October.
24. On 23 October the Council responded to Ms B’s complaint. The Council apologised for what happened and said it was unacceptable for Council staff to advise Ms B to attend before 9am on a Tuesday to get an appointment. The Council said it had told this to call centre and customer service staff. The Council said it would now arrange an appointment for Ms B. This was arranged for 29 October. Ms B was not satisfied with the Council’s response, so put in a further complaint on 25 October.
25. The appointment with the housing officer went ahead on 29 October. Ms B says the officer said she would arrange a follow-up appointment once Ms B had provided the evidence the officer requested. Ms B says her housing situation got worse during this period and she was staying with friends and relatives for only a few days at a time.
26. On 5 November Ms B sent an email to the housing officer with the evidence the officer requested. Ms B asked for a follow-up appointment. Ms B says the housing officer did not contact her again. The Council says a follow-up appointment was arranged for 19 December, but the Council has not provided any records or documents in support.
27. In mid-December Ms B complained to us.
28. The Council responded to Ms B’s complaint at the final stage of its complaints procedure on 20 December. The Council set out the correct process for booking housing advice appointments when threatened with homelessness. The Council said it had reminded staff of the process. As part of its response the Council said the Council’s delay between June and October 2018 did not have an adverse effect on Ms B’s opportunity to secure permanent accommodation. The Council provided Ms B’s bidding history and said she did not miss out on any properties. Ms B says she did not receive this response.
29. On 31 January 2019 Ms B approached the Council for housing help again.
30. Ms B says the officer arranged an appointment for the afternoon but said Ms B was unlikely to get help as she was not a priority because she does have not have children. The appointment went ahead later that day and the Council arranged a further appointment for 5 February.
31. On 5 February Ms B attended the planned appointment. The housing officer told Ms B the Council was willing to offer temporary accommodation, which would mean her housing application would remain in Band C. But, the housing officer said the Council would look into whether she could be awarded homelessness prevention points which would mean her housing register priority could increase to Band B, if she was willing to continue to stay with friends and relatives.
32. Ms B says the officer said she would provide an answer by 8 February, but she did not hear anything further until the Council increased her housing register priority to Band B on 26 February. The Council says the decision to award Band B priority had to be approved by a manager, which is why there was a short delay before Band B priority was awarded.
33. The Council’s response to my enquiries included the following comments:
• Priority within Band B is based on the date the original housing application is put in not the date Band B priority is awarded.
• The Council backdated Ms B’s Band B priority to the date she joined the housing register – 16 March 2010.
• The Council did not take a homelessness application in October 2018 and there is no evidence that a Prevention or Relief Plan was made.
• The Council has now taken a homelessness application and awarded Band B priority as allowed through the Council’s allocation policy. But, the Council should have taken a Personal Housing Plan.
• The Council has not made a decision on whether it owes Ms B the main housing duty. The Council would not normally do this where the applicant has accepted Band B priority to prevent their homelessness. Instead, the duty would be discharged as homelessness ‘prevented’ or ‘relieved’.
34. Ms B says the Council should have increased her housing register priority to Band B when she approached the Council for housing help in June 2018. Ms B says this meant she missed out on twelve properties that have been offered to applicants with a lower priority. Ms B provided details of the properties she missed out on.

Analysis

Was the Council at fault?

35. I find the Council was at fault for the way it handled Ms B’s request for housing help.
36. As the Council has accepted, it provided inconsistent information to Ms B about how to arrange a homelessness appointment. Also, I find the Council delayed arranging a homelessness appointment for Ms B between June and October 2018.
37. The homelessness appointment went ahead as planned on 29 October. In response to my enquiries the Council provided its account of what happened. But, the Council has not provided a record of the meeting.
38. Also, it is accepted by the Council that following the meeting Ms B sent further evidence to support her homelessness application, as requested by her housing officer. But, I have not seen any information to show the Council took any further action in response. The Council says it arranged a follow-up appointment for 19 December. But, I have not seen any records to support this.
39. My view is the Council was at fault for not giving detailed consideration to Ms B’s request for housing help. Ms B says at this time she was threatened with homelessness because she was sofa surfing with various friends and relatives for short periods at a time. I have not seen any information to show the Council considered whether Ms B was homeless or threatened with homelessness. This is evidence of fault. Even if the housing officer needed Ms B to provide supporting documents before making this assessment, as suggested by the Council, the Council should have done the assessment after Ms B provided the documents.
40. Ms B had to approach the Council again in January 2019 before the Council gave further consideration to her request for housing help. The Council advised Ms B it could move her housing register priority up to Band B if she could continue to stay with friends and relatives. The Council refers to this as homelessness prevention points. Ms B agreed to this. This has given Ms B a greater chance of securing a property by bidding on the Council’s housing register. Also, I do not consider there was unreasonable or excessive delay by the Council between making this suggestion (in early February 2019) and increasing Ms B’s priority (in late February 2019). In addition, the Council has explained that Ms B’s band B priority was automatically backdated to 2010, which is when she joined the housing register.
41. However, the decision to increase Ms B’s housing register priority did not remove the Council’s legal obligation to consider Ms B’s request for housing help as someone homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Council should have decided whether Ms B was homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Council’s decision to award homelessness prevention points to Ms B’s housing register application indicates the Council considered Ms B was threatened with homelessness. If so, the Council should have made an assessment and written a Personalised Housing Plan in line with its Prevention duty to her. The Council did not do this.
42. Equally, if the Council considered the Prevention Duty had ended once it placed Ms B’s housing register application in Band B it should have written and sent a decision to Ms B to tell her this. This would have meant Mr B could have used her statutory review and appeal rights to challenge this decision if she disagreed with it. The Council did not do this. This is further evidence of fault.
43. In addition, the Council delayed responding to Ms B’s complaint at both stage 1 and 2 of the Council’s complaints procedure.

Did Ms B suffer an injustice?

44. I find Ms B has suffered an injustice because of the fault I have identified.
45. First, Ms B suffered avoidable distress and time and trouble between June and October 2018 trying to get a homelessness appointment.
46. Second, Ms B has still not had her request for homelessness help properly considered by the Council. The Council has not completed an assessment, Personalised Housing Plan or told Ms B a decision in response to her application.
47. It is not straightforward to assess what would have happened if the Council had given proper consideration to Ms B’s request for homelessness help.
48. So, I cannot say it is more likely than not the Council would have offered Ms B suitable housing if it had acted in line with its homelessness duties. But, my view is Ms B has suffered distress and uncertainty because of the Council’s failure to accept and consider her homelessness application.
49. Third, the Council delayed increasing Ms B’s housing register priority. Once the Council considered Ms B’s request for housing help in early 2019, it increased her housing register priority to Band B and backdated the award to 2010. This was for homelessness prevention reasons. My view is it is more likely than not the Council would have made this decision in July 2018 if it had given prompt and careful consideration to Ms B’s homelessness application. This is because Ms B’s housing situation – ‘sofa surfing’ with friends and relatives – was the same in July 2018 as it was in February 2019.
50. The Council says the award of Band B priority in February 2019 has now placed Ms B in the position she would have been in had there been no fault. I disagree. The Council’s delay making this award has meant Ms B did not benefit from this increased priority for re-housing between July 2018 and February 2019.
51. Ms B has provided information on twelve properties which she bidded for during this period. Ms B says these properties were allocated to applicants with a lower priority than her new Band B priority. The Council provided Ms B’s 2018 bidding history when it responded to her complaint. This does not include all the properties Ms B has referred to, but it provides some support for Ms B’s claim. Also, the Council now accepts that Ms B would have received an offer of housing if she had been awarded Band B priority in July 2018. So, my view is it is more likely than not Ms B missed out on suitable properties because of the Council’s delay increasing her housing register priority.
52. I have asked the Council to make a payment to Ms B for the distress she suffered living in unsuitable accommodation since June 2018. Ms B says if the Council had awarded her Band B priority promptly she would have been able to successfully bid for the first available property in July 2018. But, the first available property may not have met her needs. Also, there can be delays before a Council property is ready for a tenant to move into. So, I cannot say Ms B would have had her own accommodation from as early as July 2018 if the Council had not been at fault.
53. Ms B also says the Council’s fault had a significant impact on her existing physical and mental health conditions, and she developed stress-related conditions during this period. Ms B also says her housing situation meant she lost a new job a few days after starting, and she had to withdraw from her studies.
54. The payment I have asked the Council to make reflects the distress Ms B suffered during this period. But, I cannot say with any degree of certainty when Ms B would have moved into her own property if the Council had promptly awarded Band B priority. Also, I cannot say on balance that the claimed injustice is directly and solely the result of the Council’s fault. So, the payment I have asked the Council to make does not reflect all Ms B’s claimed financial losses during this period.

Agreed action

55. To put right the injustice suffered by Ms B as a result of fault by the Council, I recommend that within two months of my final decision, the Council:
• Writes and sends an apology to Ms B for the fault I have identified and the injustice she suffered as a result.
• Makes a financial payment to Ms B of £200 for her distress and time and trouble trying to arrange a homelessness appointment.
• Makes a financial payment of £200 to Ms B to reflect her distress and uncertainty caused by the Council’s failure to give proper consideration to her homelessness application.
• Awards Ms B’s housing register application Band A priority (as a remedy for Ms B missing out on properties due to the delay awarding Band B priority).
• Makes a financial payment to Ms B of £500 in recognition of the avoidable distress she has suffered living in unsuitable accommodation since June 2018.
• Writes and sends to Ms B and us an action plan to set out its learning from this complaint and the actions it has taken in response.
56. The Council has agreed to these recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

57. The Council was at fault and Ms B suffered a significant injustice as a result. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

58. Ms B also complains that the Council should have placed her housing application in Band B in 2010 when she joined the housing register.
59. In addition, Ms B complains that the Council should have taken a homelessness application from her in 2010.
60. I have not investigated these complaints. Ms B has not complained to us within 12 months of becoming aware of the issues she complains about. I have not seen any information to suggest there were good reasons for Ms B’s delay. Also, because of the significant amount of time that has passed, it is highly unlikely we could make sound findings about what happened.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman