Summary: The Council took sufficient action to assist Mr X in relieving his homelessness. The Council is at fault as it placed Mr X in a room which had not been cleaned when it provided emergency accommodation. But this did not cause significant injustice to Mr X and there is no evidence to show the emergency accommodation overall was unsuitable.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council failed to provide adequate assistance to him when he said he was homeless and did not assist him when he found private rented accommodation. Mr X also complains the Council placed him in unsuitable emergency 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’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. 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

4. I have:
• Considered the complaint and the information provided by Mr X;
• Discussed the issues with Mr X;
• Made enquiries of the Council and considered the information provided;
• Invited Mr X and the Council to comment on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

What the Council should do

5. A council must take a homelessness application if it has reason to believe a person is homeless or is threatened with homelessness within 56 days. If the council considers a person is homeless and eligible for assistance it must carry out an assessment of circumstances of the person’s homelessness and their housing needs. The councils should then prepare a personal housing plan (PHP) with the person to agreed what steps the person and council will take to prevent or relieve their homelessness. The council should notify a person in writing when it makes decisions on a homelessness application including when its duty to prevent or relieve homelessness comes to an end.

What happened

6. Mr X visited the Council on 4 April for help with housing as he had left his family home. Mr X has physical and mental health conditions. Officer A, homeless prevention officer, interviewed Mr X to find out if he was homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Council’s records note Mr X said he had left the family home due to stress. He agreed he would go home and speak with his wife and would come back to the Council on 8 April if things did not work out.
7. Mr X has said that during the interview officer A referred to people from the area where Mr X is from as racist. Officer A has provided a statement. She says she referred to an incident where a person had been racist to her but she did not say all people from Mr X’s home area were racist.
8. Mr X says he visited the Council again on 8 April but was told officer A was not available. Officer A says she was available on this date.
9. Officer A sent a letter to Mr X on 8 April. In this letter she said the Council was satisfied Mr X was not homeless or going to be made homeless in the next 56 days. Officer A set out the information provided by Mr X, including about his health, and that Mr X had decided to leave. Officer A also set out her advice that Mr X should discuss the situation with his wife and come back to the Council on 8 April if things did not work out.
10. Mr X contacted officer A on 9 April to say he had found a property. The Council may pay a person’s deposit and one month’s rent in advance to enable them to rent a property. The Council’s records show officer A raised concerns that Mr X could not afford to rent the property. Mr X was unhappy with officer A’s advice and could not rent a smaller property as it would prevent his children from staying overnight.
11. On 11 April Mr X’s wife notified the Council that she would not allow Mr X to return to the family home. On 12 April the Council decided Mr X was homeless and eligible for assistance. The Council offered bed and breakfast accommodation to him as emergency accommodation. The Council should also have sent a letter to Mr X advising it had a duty to relive his homelessness at this point but did not do so.
12. Mr X contacted the Council and spoke to officer B about a property he wanted to rent. Officer B spoke to the agent who advised the property was only available for people over 55 years. The Council’s records show officer B contacted Mr X to inform him of the age restriction.
13. Mr X contacted the Council on 16 April as he had found another property. Officer C contacted the agent to discuss. The Council’s records note the agent did not know Mr X was claiming benefits and he would discuss further with the landlord and Mr X if he made contact again.
14. Officer C contacted Mr X on 16 April to discuss the affordability of the property. The Council’s record of the call notes officer C advised Mr X of the information he needed to provide if the agent accepted him as a tenant.
15. The record also shows Mr X said he was unhappy with the condition of the emergency accommodation as he had to provide his own bedding and the room smelled. Officer C arranged for Mr X to move to another property on the same day. The Council has acknowledged its temporary accommodation provider should not have placed Mr X in the room as it had not been cleaned and was not ready for occupation.
16. Mr X provided the information for his application for the property on 17 April. The Council’s records note Mr X said he had also viewed another property. The Council advised Mr X that if agents agreed he could rent either property it would look at paying the deposit and rent in advance.
17. On 18 April Mr X visited the Council and spoke to officer D about one of the properties he had found. Officer D spoke to the agents about the costs. Mr X completed a financial assessment and considered he could afford the property. The Council then agreed to pay the deposit and rent in advance. The Council’s records show tried to arrange to pay the agent by credit card as an exceptional arrangement due to Mr X’s health to allow Mr X to move in that day. The agents needed to wait for Mr X’s references and could not accept a credit card payment so the tenancy could not proceed at this time.
18. On 23 April the Council carried out an assessment of the circumstances of Mr X’s homelessness and drew up a personalised housing plan setting out the action to be taken by Mr X to relive his homelessness. This included Mr X would find private rented accommodation and the Council would pay the deposit.
19. On 25 April the Council agreed to pay Mr X’s deposit and rent in advance by BACS which is an automated payment. The Council’s records show officers advised Mr X it would take two to three weeks to process the BACS payment which Mr X was unhappy about. Mr X moved into the new property in mid May.
20. Mr X considers the Council failed to provide him with proper assistance when he presented as homeless. He says officer A said all people from his home area were racist and the Council caused him to lose one of the properties he was seeking. Mr X has also said officers lost his records on three occasions.
21. Mr X also considers the emergency accommodation he was initially placed in was unsuitable due to disrepair, including damage to the bed by rats. Mr X considers the second bed and breakfast accommodation was also unsuitable due to other residents with drug addiction problems and disrepair. The Council has said Mr X did not inform it of the damage to the bed or make any complaints about the second bed and breakfast. The Council has also said no other residents complained about the standards or drug use at either bed and breakfast shortly before or during the time Mr X was there.

My assessment

22. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council considered if Mr X was homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Council interviewed Mr X to establish his circumstances, including that he had voluntarily left the family home. The Council’s records show Mr X agreed to go home and speak with his wife. Mrs X had not informed the Council that she would not allow Mr X to return at this time. So, Mr X was not threatened with homelessness at this time.
23. Mr X and officer A have provided different accounts of whether officer A told Mr X that all people from his home area are racist. I have no means of establishing whether officer A’s account or Mr X’s account is correct. So, I will not pursue this matter further.
24. Officer A invited Mr X to contact her on 8 April if he was unable to resolve matters with Mrs X. The Council has said officer A was available on that date. Mr X has said the Council told him she was not. I do not know which account is correct but I will not pursue the matter further as Mr X was able to contact officer A on 9 April.
25. There is no evidence of delay by the Council when Mr X notified officers he had found private rented properties. The Council contacted the agents quickly and updated Mr X on each occasion. It would inevitably take time between Mr X identifying a property and being able to move in as the agent required references and for the deposit and rent in advance payment to be processed by the Council.
26. The Council carried out an assessment of Mr X’s housing circumstances and drew up a PHP. It would have been better if the Council had carried out the assessment and PHP when it decided it owed the relief duty to Mr X. But this did not disadvantage Mr X as the evidence shows the Council was assisting Mr X with securing private rented property before it carried out the assessment and drew up the PHP.
27. Mr X has said the Council lost his records on three occasions. I have not seen any evidence to show the Council lost Mr X’s records as it has provided them. I do not know if officers could not access the records while interviewing Mr X. But I will not pursue this further as this does not cause significant injustice to Mr X to warrant further investigation. The evidence shows officers were assisting Mr X.

Bed and breakfast accommodation

28. The Council has acknowledged that its provider wrongly placed Mr X in a room which had not been cleaned. This is fault. This would have been unpleasant for Mr X but I do not consider this is significant enough injustice to warrant seeking a remedy from the Council. Mr X was only at the property for three nights and the Council resolved the matter by moving Mr X as soon as he notified it of the problem.
29. I have considered Mr X’s photographs of both bed and breakfasts. The photographs of both properties do not show conditions which could call into question the Council’s position that the accommodation was suitable. The photographs show Mr X’s bed in the first bed and breakfast was worn but there is no evidence of damage by rats. Furthermore, there is no evidence Mr X raised concerns about other residents at either property.

Back to top

Final decision

30. The Council took sufficient action to assist Mr X in relieving his homelessness. The Council is at fault as it placed Mr X in a room which had not been cleaned when it provided emergency accommodation. But this did not cause significant injustice to Mr X and there is no evidence to show the emergency accommodation overall was unsuitable.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman