Summary: there was fault in the way the Council carried out the homelessness prevention duty. Miss X did not become homeless but she suffered uncertainty due to the delay in handling her case and the Council’s poor communication. The Council has agreed to provide a suitable remedy. There was no fault in the Council’s handling of Miss X’s Let to Birmingham and Housing Register applications.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that the Council has not given her adequate housing advice and assistance since late January 2018 when she moved to her current accommodation. She lives in a single room in supported accommodation where she shares a kitchen and bathroom with five other residents.
2. Miss X says the accommodation is unsuitable and unaffordable. She wants to move to a self-contained one bedroom flat.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
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 have spoken to Miss X and considered all the evidence she sent me.
6. I considered the Council’s response to my enquiries and the relevant housing records.
7. I considered comments from Miss X and the Council on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

The background to this complaint

8. Miss X is single. She approached the Council’s housing options centre for housing advice and assistance in late January 2018. She had given notice to leave a room she was renting in a house in multiple occupation because it was damp and cold.
9. Miss X made this approach to the Council before the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 came into force in April 2018. The Act introduced enhanced legal duties to assist single homeless people who were not in priority need.
10. A housing needs officer interviewed Miss X and referred her to an independent registered provider of social housing based in the Housing Options centre. The Council had an agreement with this organisation to provide advice and assistance to single homeless people who were not in priority need.
11. The independent registered provider arranged for Miss X to move to a single room in supported accommodation in late January 2018. The Council was not involved at this stage. The accommodation Miss X moved to is owned and managed by another housing provider. Miss X shares a kitchen and bathroom with five other residents.
12. Miss X says the registered provider did not explain before she moved in that Housing Benefit would not meet the full weekly charge of £263.45. Miss X must pay the shortfall of £53.94 between the rent and Housing Benefit. She also pays a service charge which is not eligible for Housing Benefit.

Miss X’s homelessness application

The relevant legal duties

13. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 (as amended) and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to assist people who are homeless, or threatened with homelessness.
14. 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; or
• he or she has been served with a valid Section 21 Notice by the landlord.

(Housing Act 1996, section 175(4))

15. If a council is satisfied someone is homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must complete a housing assessment. 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.
16. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps which the council and the applicant will take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. This 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).
17. The Code of Guidance includes the following examples of steps the council may include in the PHP (this list is not exhaustive):
• assessing whether applicants with rent arrears might be entitled to a Discretionary Housing Payment;
• providing support to applicants, whether financial or otherwise, to access private rented accommodation;
18. If agreement about the steps to be undertaken by both parties cannot be reached, the authority must record in writing why not, but it must still prepare a plan setting out any steps the authority consider it would be reasonable for the applicant to take, and what steps the authority will be taking. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)
19. The Council has a legal duty to give the applicant a written record of the PHP and to keep it under regular review.

What happened

20. On 12 April 2018 Miss X completed a form on the Council’s website to request homelessness assistance. She said she could not afford her accommodation because of the £53.94 shortfall between Housing Benefit and the full weekly charge. She said she had no rent arrears.
21. The new duties introduced by the Homelessness Act 2017 to prevent and relieve homelessness had just come into force.
22. Officer A, a housing needs officer in the Housing Options Centre, interviewed Miss X and completed a housing needs assessment on 12 April. The assessment says Miss X was threatened with homelessness because she had been served with a valid Section 21 notice. It said the Council therefore owed her the prevention duty. Miss X says she does not remember this interview. She says she did not tell the Council she had been served with a Section 21 notice.
23. During our investigation the Council confirmed Miss X’s landlord did not serve a Section 21 Notice. Her reasons for presenting as homeless were the unaffordability of the accommodation and the fact she felt unsafe as the only female resident in the supported accommodation. The note about service of a section 21 Notice seems to have been an error on Officer A’s part.
24. The Council did not notify Miss X in writing that it had accepted the prevention duty. Miss X says she did not know the Council had accepted the prevention duty and did not know what it was.
25. Officer A prepared a PHP which Miss X signed on 12 April. It does not include any steps the Council would take to help Miss X. It only lists steps for Miss X to take to try to resolve her housing needs. It said she would:
• complete and return income and expenditure forms;
• apply for a Discretionary Housing Payment;
• apply to join the Council’s Housing Register (Birmingham Choice);
• complete and return an application form for the Let to Birmingham scheme;
• look for private rented accommodation and ask the Council for assistance with a deposit and rent in advance if she found a suitable property.
26. From the records I have seen, it seems the Council took no action under the prevention duty between 12 April and October 2018.
27. In early October 2018, Officer B, a senior officer in the Housing Options Service tried to contact Miss X. He managed to speak to her on 22 October. She told him she was still in the same accommodation. She did not have any medical conditions or disabilities. She said other residents were causing a noise nuisance. Miss X told Officer B she was starting a full-time job the following day and she wanted to move to a one-bedroom property.
28. Following his telephone call with Miss X, Officer B completed a homelessness assessment. He sent a homelessness decision letter on the same day. It said he was satisfied she was eligible for assistance and threatened with homelessness. He explained the Council had accepted a duty in April 2018 to prevent her becoming homeless by helping her keep her current accommodation or find suitable alternative accommodation. The prevention duty had now ended because he was satisfied she was not homeless. She had not been served with a Section 21 Notice and she could remain in the accommodation. The letter did not address Miss X’s original concerns about the affordability of the accommodation. It explained Miss X’s right to request a review of the decision within 21 days.
29. Miss X did not receive the letter so she did not request a review of the decision to end the duty.

Miss X’s application to the Let to Birmingham scheme

30. Let to Birmingham is a social lettings agency set up in partnership with the Council. It managed private rented sector properties for landlords and nominated prospective tenants.
31. The Housing Options centre received a weekly list of properties from Let to Birmingham. The Housing Needs officer informed homeless applicants about the scheme during the homelessness assessment interview. If they wished to be considered for the scheme, they had to complete an application form which was passed on to Let to Birmingham for registration. If any properties on the list were suitable for an applicant, the Housing Needs officer could ask Let to Birmingham to consider them. Let to Birmingham arranged property viewings for the successful applicants.
32. The Council continued to nominate applicants for properties that had been advertised in December 2018.
33. The Council’s records show it received Miss X’s application form on 13 April 2018. But there were no one bedroom properties in her selected area.
34. The Council’s records show Officer B made two attempts to contact Miss X in mid-December 2018 to ask if she would be interested in a one-bedroom property. According to his case notes, he left two messages for Miss X but she did not return his calls.
35. Miss X says she did not receive any messages from Officer B. She does remember Officer B called her on one occasion to ask if she would be interested in accommodation outside Birmingham. She does not remember the date of this call.
36. On 18 December Miss X completed a new Let to Birmingham application form. Miss X stated on the form that she shared her accommodation with five men and did not feel comfortable with this arrangement.
37. Officer B forwarded the form to Officer C, a housing needs officer who dealt with Let to Birmingham applications. He asked Officer C to consider Miss X for two studio flats that were available through the Let to Birmingham scheme.
38. Officer C made an entry in the case notes saying the studio flats may not be suitable for a woman because most of the other occupiers were men. She noted from Miss X’s form that she was living in shared accommodation with men and felt vulnerable there. The note says she would consider Miss X for any other suitable properties.
39. Miss X says Officer C made a wrong assumption and did not speak to her before making this decision. Miss X says she had made it clear when she met Officer B that she did not mind living in a self-contained flat in a building with male tenants. She simply objected to living in supported accommodation where she had to share a bathroom and kitchen with male residents.
40. The Council suspended its contract with Let to Birmingham in late December 2018. Consequently, Miss X was not considered for any other properties. Her application is now on hold until the Council decides whether to continue or end the Let to Birmingham scheme.
41. In response to my enquiries, the Council says it can still offer Miss X assistance through the Homelessness Prevention Fund to pay a deposit and one month’s rent in advance if she can find suitable private rented accommodation. The Housing Options centre can give her further advice and information about this option.

Miss X’s application to join the Housing Register

The relevant law

42. Section 166A of the Housing Act 196 says every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme to set out its rules for accepting applications to join the Housing Register and allocating social housing.
43. The 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 medical or welfare grounds;
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others;

44. A council must notify applicants in writing if it decides they do not qualify to join the Housing Register. They must also notify the right to request a review of this decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))

Birmingham’s housing allocations policy

45. Due to the very limited availability of social housing in Birmingham, the Council does not maintain an “open” Housing Register. Only applicants with an assessed housing need, as defined in the Council’s housing allocations scheme, qualify to join the Register.
46. I have read the relevant parts of the Council’s April 2017 Housing Allocations scheme which was in force when Miss X applied to join the Housing Register.
47. The scheme sets out the criteria for each category of housing need. An applicant who lives in insanitary or unfit private rented accommodation may qualify for Band One priority. But this is only awarded when the Council has inspected the property and found evidence of a Category 1 hazard (excluding overcrowding) under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System. A Category 1 hazard may arise in a property with severe damp, major structural defects such as subsidence or flooding, or the living conditions amount to a statutory nuisance. There must also be no prospect that the defects will be remedied within six months. A lower Band Two award may apply when someone lives in unsatisfactory private rented accommodation. None of the criteria for Band 2 apply in Miss X’s case.
48. The Council’s scheme does not award priority for lack of facilities to people who live in shared accommodation and must share a kitchen or bathroom with other residents.
49. The Council’s scheme also included a category of housing need for hardship. The scheme did not give any further guidance or detailed criteria, or say whether this included financial hardship. It simply stated that because the city is geographically compact, with good transport links, a hardship award is only made in exceptional circumstances

What happened

50. Miss X made an online application to join the Council’s Housing Register in November 2017 from her previous address.
51. In mid-February 2018 the Council informed Miss X she did not qualify to join the Housing Register because she did not have a recognised housing need (as defined in its housing allocations scheme). The letter told Miss X she could request a review by writing to the Housing Options review team within 21 days.
52. By the time she received this decision, Miss X had moved to her current address. Miss X requested a review.
53. On 23 March 2018 a Review Officer sent Miss X a decision. The officer closed the review because Miss X had since made a new Housing Register application from her new address. The new application superseded the earlier application and had not yet been assessed.
54. On the new application, Miss X ticked the boxes for “hardship” and living in “insanitary or unfit conditions” as her housing needs. The Council assessed her application and then wrote to tell her she did not qualify to join the Housing Register.
55. In early May 2018 Miss X asked for a review of the new decision. She said her rent was unaffordable and she was concerned that she may be at risk from the male residents. She said the accommodation was in a poor condition and she could not cook any meals there.
56. On 24 May 2018 the Review team replied to her review request. It said a hardship award is only made where the applicant’s accommodation was causing financial hardship and this could be alleviated by a move to a different area of Birmingham. As Miss X wished to continue living in the same area, it did not consider a move to alternative accommodation would improve her financial position. It said an award for insanitary or unfit conditions could only be made if officers had inspected and found a Category 1 hazard in the property which could not be rectified within six months. It said it had no evidence that Miss X’s property had been inspected and met these criteria.

Miss X’s views

57. Miss X says her current accommodation is unsuitable for several reasons. She struggles to pay the rent and service charge because she is on a low income. She is regularly disturbed by the anti-social behaviour of the other residents. She does not want to live in supported accommodation where some residents engage in substance abuse and have a criminal background. She feels vulnerable. The shared kitchen and bathroom are dirty and poorly maintained. She does not cook meals in the kitchen for this reason. Her room is cluttered with her furniture and belongings from her previous flat because she cannot afford to put them in storage.

Analysis

The homelessness application

58. In April 2018 the Council decided it owed Miss X the prevention duty. But it did not notify her in writing of this decision as the law requires. Following the housing assessment, it produced a PHP. But the PHP was flawed because it did not set out any steps the Council would take to help her remain in her accommodation, or secure alternative accommodation. This was fault.
59. Although Miss X signed the PHP, I have seen no evidence that the Council gave her a copy, or kept it under review between April and October 2018. This was further fault. Miss X did not know she could request a review of the PHP on the grounds it failed to include any steps the Council would take.
60. There was also unreasonable delay. The Council took no action between April and October 2018. Officer B then spoke to Miss X and issued the “not homeless” decision. It was fault not to take any action, and not to review the case for six months, following the initial April 2018 interview.
61. The homelessness decision letter should have directly addressed Miss X’s principal concern that it was not reasonable for her to continue to occupy her room in the supported accommodation because it was unaffordable.
62. The Ombudsman will not comment on the decision to Council’s duty to end the prevention duty in October 2018 because that was a reviewable decision.
63. The delay and poor communication caused Miss X considerable frustration and uncertainty. However, Miss X did not become homeless and remained in the supported accommodation.

The Let to Birmingham application

64. Miss X agreed to complete an application form for the Let to Birmingham scheme when she signed the PHP on 12 April 2018. She delivered the form to the Housing Options centre on 13 April 2018. The Council’s notes say there were no one bedroom properties available at that time in the areas Miss X selected.
65. On 18 December Miss X completed a new Let to Birmingham form. Officer B forwarded it to Officer C and asked her to consider Miss X for two studio flats.
66. According to Officer C’s notes, she decided, based on the information on Miss X’s form, that these properties may not be suitable for Miss X because the other residents in the building were men. She had noted that Miss X had concerns about sharing supported accommodation with men. For this reason, Officer C did not consider Miss X for these properties. There seems to have been a misunderstanding here. As Miss X says, there is a difference between living in supported accommodation where she had to share facilities with male residents and living in a self-contained flat in a building occupied by male tenants. But I must also take into account that it is by no means certain that Miss X would have been offered a tenancy of one of these flats if she had been put forward. The final decision about whether to accept Miss X as a tenant would have rested with the landlord not the Council.

The Housing Register application

67. Not everyone who applies to join the Council’s Housing Register will meet the qualifying criteria and be accepted. The Council must assess the application and decide if the person has one or more of the housing needs defined in its housing allocations scheme. After considering the information on Miss X’s housing register application forms, the Council decided Miss X did not meet any of its housing need criteria.
68. Miss X disagrees with this decision. She considers she has significant housing needs and the Council should let her join the Housing Register. The Ombudsman must ensure the Council correctly assessed her circumstances and applied the rules in its allocations scheme. It must also give proper consideration to review requests. I found no evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Agreed action

69. The Council has agreed to take the following action within one month of this final decision:
1. interview Miss X at the Housing Options centre to assess her current housing needs and then decide whether it can offer her any practical assistance. In particular, the Council will consider:
• whether it is reasonable for Miss X to continue occupying her current accommodation with reference to affordability taking into account the rent, service charges and her income;
• if it decides it is not reasonable for her to continue to occupy the current accommodation, whether she is homeless and it owes her the relief duty;
• if it decides it is reasonable for her to continue to occupy the accommodation, whether to provide any financial assistance, such as a Discretionary Housing Payment, to meet any shortfall between the rent and Housing Benefit or financial assistance to help her secure alternative affordable accommodation;
• notify her in writing of these decisions;
1. apologise in writing to Miss X for the faults in handling the April 2018 homelessness application;
2. pay Miss X £300 for the distress and uncertainty caused by its delay, poor communication and failure to comply with legal duties.
70. Finally, it will send the Ombudsman a specimen copy of the PHP currently in use and evidence to demonstrate that officers are complying with the legal duty to include steps the Council will take in PHPs.

Back to top

Final decision

71. I have completed the investigation and found fault in the Council’s handling of Miss X’s homelessness application between April and October 2018. This caused injustice to Miss X.
72. I found no fault in the way the Council considered Miss X’s Let to Birmingham application or her Housing Register applications and review requests.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman