Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application and other related matters. This meant she was homeless for a number of months. The Ombudsman has found the Council to be at fault because it took too long to make its decision about her homelessness and other related matters. To remedy the injustice caused, the Council has agreed a remedy to reflect the level of distress caused to Miss X.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s failure to deal with her homelessness application properly. In particular, she says the Council:

• Took too long to make a decision about whether she was owed a homelessness duty.
• Evicted her from temporary accommodation without good reason.
• Failed to ensure her belongings were kept secure following this eviction.

2. Miss X says the Council’s action have caused her an injustice. She was left without anywhere to live at a time in her life when she was extremely vulnerable. This caused her great distress and hardship.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.
5. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), as amended)

6. 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

7. As part of my investigation I have:

• considered the complaint and documents provided by Miss X;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered its response;
• considered the relevant law and statutory guidance;
• considered the detailed note of a telephone discussion between a colleague and Miss X; and
• sent my draft decision to both parties and considered comments received.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law

8. 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.

The relief duty

9. Councils must take reasonable steps to secure accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
10. The Code says authorities should not delay completing their inquiries as to what further duties will be owed after the relief duty. It says where the authority has the information it requires to make a decision about priority need and intentionality, it should be possible to notify the applicant on or around day 57 (i.e. the day after the 56-day relief duty ends). In cases where significant further investigations are required the Code recommends authorities make a decision within a maximum of 15 working days after 56 days have passed.

Duty to arrange interim accommodation

11. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)

The main homelessness duty

12. 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). (Housing Act 1996, section 193)

Protection of belongings

13. Where the council owes or has owed certain housing duties to an applicant, it must protect the applicant’s personal property if there is a risk it may be lost or damaged. A council may make a reasonable charge for storage and reserve the right to dispose of the property if it loses contact with the applicant. (Housing Act 1996, section 211, Homelessness Code of Guidance chapter 20)

What happened

14. In April 2018, Miss X made a homelessness application to the Council. She had been given notice to quit by the women’s refuge where she had been living for about a year. Prior to her moving out date, the Council arranged with the refuge for Miss X to stay there for a further 3 weeks until 18 May 2018.
15. On 19 May 2018, Miss X attended a property viewing arranged by the Council but did not sign up. Miss X said this was because she could not move in straight away and so was of no use to her. That evening Miss X contacted the Council’s out of hours service saying she had nowhere to sleep that night. Her phone cut out, but in any event the Council says it would have told Miss X she had to make her own arrangements that night. Miss X says she had to sleep in her car.
16. The following day, Miss X told the Council she was still homeless. Temporary accommodation was arranged for that night, but Miss X did not use it.
17. On 22 June 2018, Miss X was offered interim accommodation at Flat B, to discharge the Council’s duty under section 188.
18. On 5 July 2018, Miss X’s landlord at Flat B issued a letter about her behaviour towards visiting contractors. The Council says this was effectively a final warning letter and was headed, “Warning letter”. The letter did not advise Miss X what would happen if the behaviour continued. The landlord says her conduct did not improve so asked her to leave, giving one weeks’ notice.
19. The Council provided four nights of accommodation after Miss X left Flat B. Having reviewed the case, the Council wrote and told Miss X that it had discharged its duty under s 188 and no longer had to provide her with interim accommodation. She was told her homelessness application was still pending.
20. Miss X says the landlord of Flat B did not keep her belongings safe. When she returned to collect them, she found many personal items in the bin, including passports and precious photographs. Other items were kept in storage by the landlord.
21. It took the Council a further six months to determine it owed a homelessness duty to Miss X in February 2019. In that time Miss X says she was effectively street homeless and managed by sofa surfing and relying on the good will of others. She says she also encountered a serious sexual assault during this time caused by her vulnerability by having nowhere safe to stay. She says the uncertainty and circumstances have caused her significant emotional distress that have made her ongoing medical conditions worse.
22. Miss X was provided with temporary accommodation under s193 in February 2019.

Her complaint

23. Miss X complained to the Council in December 2018. The Council replied in March 2019. It upheld her complaint, but the Council’s response was limited to dealing with her complaint about delay. It followed up on her further enquiry about electricity and a bed by making appropriate referrals. It confirmed she was on the housing register in band 2H. Dissatisfied with this response she complained to the Ombudsman.

The Council’s response to the Ombudsman

24. The Council accepted there had been some fault with the way it handled Miss X’s homelessness application in the following areas:

• There was a significant delay in making its decision about Miss X’s homelessness.
• It should have arranged interim accommodation on 19 June 2018, rather than 20 June 2018.
• Her homelessness application was not progressed when Miss X’s temporary housing officer left her employment with the Council.
• This also led to the Council failing to produce a Personalised Housing Plan and not fulfilling its Relief Duty.
• It should have arranged interim accommodation in December 2018. The Council has acknowledged officers should have kept better records of its decision making at this time.

25. To ensure these mistakes do not reoccur, the Council has already put in place a number of service improvements:

• Recruited more staff.
• Introduced a new computer system.
• Improved recording practices.

26. It also made the following general observations about the complaint:

• Miss X signed an agreement with the landlord of Flat B that her license to occupy could be cancelled in the event of unacceptable behaviour. She was sent a warning letter but there were more incidents. The contactor refused to carry out works in Miss X’s flat.
• She damaged the property when forcing entry to her flat when she mislaid her keys. She had been advised how to obtain a duplicate key.
• The landlord denies throwing Miss X’s belongings in the bin. It said Miss X did this herself and took photographs. It says her other belongings were kept safe in a lock up.
• The landlord did not keep an inventory of Miss X’s belongings that had been left in its possession for safekeeping. It should have done so.
• The Council did not have a duty to protect Miss X’s belongings because she had not told the Council about this.

27. Since making her complaint to the Ombudsman, the Council has also made the following arrangements to remedy the injustice to her:

• Identified a suitable one bedroom flat in an area specified by Miss X
• Funded travel for viewings.
• Arranged a removal van.
• Apologised to Miss X.
• Backdated her application to join the housing register to June 2018.

28. While the Council has accepted some fault in the matter and sought to remedy the injustice, Miss X remains dissatisfied. She says the Council’s response does not address the following matters;

• The Council’s decision to evict her without giving her a prior waring was unfair and left her homeless. While the Council has now found her suitable accommodation, it does not make up for the impact the homelessness had on her wellbeing. She says this also affected her ability to offer a home for her children who have remained in their father’s care.
• The Council’s failure to secure her belongings caused her loss of irreplaceable items and the associated distress. She also says forensic evidence from a sexual assault was destroyed.

Analysis

29. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.
30. I have considered each of the matters complained about below where Miss X was dissatisfied with the outcome of the Council’s own investigation. I will not make further findings in respect of the areas of fault already identified by the Council at paragraph 24 above. But I will go on to consider whether the Council’s remedy is adequate.

Termination of interim accommodation at Flat B

31. The Council says it correctly ended its duty to provide Miss X with interim accommodation. In support of this position, the Council relies on both the warning letter sent by the landlord and the licence agreement signed by Miss X.
32. The warning letter sets out details of Miss X’s unreasonable behaviour and makes clear it will not be tolerated. The letter does not say she will be asked to leave if it continues.
33. I have also considered the “Nightly Paid Accommodation Agreement” signed by Miss X. This said Miss X was “responsible for her behaviour”. It also said it could end the placement with reasonable notice if she “contravened these conditions”.
34. On 20 July 2018, the landlord of Flat B advised Miss X by email that she had seven days to vacate the property. No reasons were given in that email. The Council did arrange alternative interim accommodation for four nights while it made a decision about its duties towards her. Its decision letter set out the reasons for her “eviction” which included two incidents of verbal aggression towards contractors and damage to the property following the loss of keys.
35. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to say whether these were adequate grounds to ask Miss X to leave as long as the correct procedure was followed.
36. I have some sympathy for Miss X because one of the incidents was a contractor attempting to enter her flat without permission. As a victim of domestic violence, Miss X was understandably alarmed and upset by this incident. However, the decision to ask her to leave was not based on this incident alone.
37. She had signed an agreement which explained she could be asked to leave at short notice if her behaviour was unacceptable. While I do not consider the wording in the agreement “responsible for her behaviour” is as clear as it should be, I believe there is a general understanding that a tenant’s behaviour must not fall below a certain threshold. Miss X would have known this.
38. There was no requirement to give her a “last chance”. So while it may have been preferable to specify this in the “warning letter”, in the absence of any requirement to do so, I do not find fault here.
39. The letter stated there was no right to a review of the decision. This is correct. But the Council should have then made a timely decision on her homelessness application. It is this fault that caused the significant injustice to Miss X.

Failure to secure Miss X’s possessions

40. Miss X says some of her belongings were left in the bin outside Flat B. She took a photograph that I have seen. This shows a box of assorted belongings in a cardboard box next to wheelie bins, a tied bin bag and a canvas print of a young child. The landlord of Flat B says it was told by a contractor that Miss X took items to the bin outside and took photos herself.
41. Under the service level agreement between the Council and the landlord, it is the landlord’s responsibility to store belongings for up to 14 days. It should take a full inventory and take photographs.
42. While it agreed by all involved that some of Miss X’s belongings were stored in a lock up, it is Miss X’s belief that some were thrown away. This dispute could have been resolved had the inventory been completed and photos taken.
43. The Ombudsman makes decisions on the balance of probabilities. In this aspect of the complaint, the issues relate to one person’s word against another. As I am unable to prefer one account over another, I am unable to make a finding about whether the landlord disposed of her belongings or not.
44. But there was fault here because it did not complete the inventory that would have determined this issue one way of the other. This led to Miss X being uncertain about what had happened to her property.

Injustice

45. The Council has already put a number of measures in place to remedy the injustice caused. I welcome this. But I do not consider they adequately reflect the significant injustice caused to Miss X. My recommendations seek to properly acknowledge the several months delay in making its homelessness decision and the uncertainty caused by the landlord’s failure to keep an inventory of her belongings.
46. In making my recommendations below, I must have regard also for the complainant’s own conduct in this matter which contributed to her continued homelessness. The Council had provided interim accommodation at Flat B that could have continued until her homelessness application was determined. As I have not found fault in the decision to cancel this placement, the financial remedy below reflects this.
47. I have not made any service improvement recommendations because the Council has already put in place appropriate actions.

Agreed action

48. To remedy the outstanding injustice set out in this decision statement the Council has agreed to take the following action:

• Apologise in writing to Miss X.
• Pay Miss X £600. This is £100 for each of the six months she remained homeless once her interim accommodation ended in July 2018. In reaching my decision I have had regard to the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies.
• Pay Miss X a further £250 to acknowledge the failure by the landlord, acting on behalf of the Council, to complete an inventory of Miss X’s belongings and also to recognise her time and trouble spent dealing with this matter.

49. This action should take place within four weeks from the date of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

50. There was fault in the way the Council dealt with Miss X’s homelessness application. The Council has agreed a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman