Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to support him when he became homeless. Mr X has since moved to a different council’s area. The investigation was discontinued because there was insufficient evidence to make a robust decision.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to help him with housing when he became homeless in January 2019. He said the Council did not properly consider his mental health when dealing with his case.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)
3. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I spoke to Mr X and considered the information he provided. I considered the information the Council sent me. I considered relevant law and guidance (as set out below) and our guidance on remedies.
5. I gave the Council and Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decisions. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. 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.
7. When a person applies to a council for accommodation and the council 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.
8. 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 (PHP). (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance chapter 11)
9. If the Council thinks someone may be homeless and in priority need, it must, if the person asks for it, provide emergency accommodation until it has finished assessing the homelessness application.  Examples of priority need are:
• people with dependent children;
• people with serious health problems;
• some elderly people.

Housing allocation

10. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing.  All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme.   (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
11. An allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants in the following categories:

• homeless people;
• people in insanitary, overcrowded or unsatisfactory housing;
• people who need to move on medial or welfare grounds;
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others.

(Housing Act 1996, section 166A(3))

12. Most Councils keep a housing register which records all current applications and their priority. If the Council decides to suspend or close an application it must write to the applicant and give its reasons.

What happened

13. Mr X became homeless in late January 2019. He approached the Council for help in early February. The Council accepted a homelessness application. It agreed he was homeless and eligible for assistance. It confirmed this by letter.
14. The Council’s record says Mr X told it at the initial appointment he was suffering from anxiety, paranoia and depression and was taking two types of prescribed medication for this.
15. The Council says it advised Mr X about the consequences of providing false information, following which Mr X completed an application form. In the application form Mr X stated he was suffering from anxiety.
16. Mr X says he provided sick notes at the initial interview and the Council asked him to provide GP records, which took a few days to obtain. The Council says he did not provide any medical evidence.
17. On the basis of the application form the Council says it had no reason to believe Mr X was in priority need.
18. The Council did not prepare a personalised housing plan (PHP) at the initial appointment but did take steps to resolve his homelessness, including referring him for supported accommodation. The officer said he would contact Mr X later to complete a PHP.
19. The Council referred Mr X for supported accommodation and a place was offered in mid February. Mr X was not happy with this accommodation and left after a few days. There is no record that he told the Council he had left or the reasons why the accommodation was not suitable for him.
20. Mr X applied to the Council’s housing register. The Council accepted his application and placed him in its medium band. It explained Mr X could bid for one bedroom properties or studio flats.
21. Mr X says the Council told him he was “low priority” and should consider moving to a different area where he had a stronger local connection. Council records do not show he was told he was “low priority” but do show Mr X told it in late February that he planned to move to another council area where his mother lived.
22. Mr X moved to another council’s area and asked it to help him with his housing needs. The new council shared a system with this Council, which meant Mr X could bid for properties in both areas using the same account.
23. The next action by this Council was in mid March when it telephoned Mr X to offer him a property. Mr X refused the property because he said he was now living over 200 miles away. He asked the Council to cancel his housing register application and it did so.
24. The Council wrote to Mr X to say that as he had refused the offer of a flat that it considered suitable for him, it was no longer under a duty to help him with his homelessness. It explained Mr X could ask for a review of this decision. Mr X did not ask for a review.

My findings

25. Mr X asked the Council for help. It took a homelessness application. It decided Mr X was homeless and eligible for assistance. It sent Mr X a letter to confirm this, which explained his review and appeal rights.
26. The Council says the order of events is important. It says when Mr X was warned about giving false information he only said he suffered from anxiety. On this basis, it had no reason to believe Mr X was in priority need.
27. I have not been able to determine from the records the order in which events happened and have not been able to clarify this with Mr X. I am therefore not able to reach firm conclusions about what happened.
28. Mr X says he gave the Council medical evidence. The Council says he did not do so. There is no reference to receiving medical evidence in its records. On balance, I consider it did not receive medical evidence.
29. It was not fault that the Council did not prepare a PHP for Mr X at the initial interview. There is no record the Council took any action to issue a PHP after the initial interview. However, Mr X moved to another area soon afterwards.
30. The Council referred Mr X for housing assistance. It was not involved in identifying the placement for him and was not told about his concerns about its suitability.
31. Mr X says the Council advised him to move to another area where he had a stronger local connection. The Council denied giving this advice and there is no record that it did so.
32. Mr X was told he could ask for a review of the Council’s decision to end its duty. If he was unhappy with that decision it was reasonable for him to ask the Council for a review. He did not do so.
33. The Council accepted an application to its housing register and sent Mr X a letter to confirm this. It set up an account and explained he could bid for one bedroom properties and studio flats. The Council offered accommodation in March but Mr X refused this because he had moved to another council area by then.

Back to top

Final decision

34. I have discontinued my investigation. This is because there is insufficient evidence to reach robust conclusions about what happened.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman