Summary: Ms X complains the Council did not give her proper assistance when she approached as homeless. The Council failed to take an application at the earliest opportunity, did not issue decision letters or a personalised housing plan, and failed to consider the suitability of interim accommodation. These faults caused Ms X injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a financial payment to Ms X, and take action to improve its service.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council did not give her proper assistance when she approached as homeless.
2. As a result, Ms X says she was placed in unsuitable interim accommodation and suffered unnecessary distress and uncertainty.

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. 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 spoke to Ms X about the complaint.
6. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
7. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Homeless Law and Guidance

8. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the Code) set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
9. 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. 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)
10. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for 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 which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5))

11. If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must take a homelessness application and make inquiries. The threshold for taking an application is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular council department. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5) 
12. 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)
13. 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)
14. If councils are satisfied applicants are homeless and eligible for assistance, they must take reasonable steps to secure accommodation. 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)
15. 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)
16. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of his or her household.  This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty.  (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and (from 3 April 2018) Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
17. If, at the end of the relief duty, 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. This is called the main duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
18. After completing inquiries, the council must give the applicant a decision in writing. If it is an adverse decision, the letter must fully explain the reasons.  All letters must include information about the right to request a review and the timescale for doing so. (Housing Act 1996, section 184, Homelessness Code of Guidance 18.32 and 18.33)

Background

19. In May 2019, Ms X approached the Council. She told the Council about her ex-partner, whom I shall call Mr Z. Mr Z was sent to prison for domestic violence towards her. Ms X told the Council he was due to be released that summer.
20. The Council assessed the risk as low because Mr Z was still in prison. It told Ms X to come back closer to the release date.
21. In September 2019, Ms X returned to the Council. Her ex-partner was scheduled to be released that month.
22. The Council completed an assessment of Ms X and offered her interim accommodation. Ms X says this accommodation was unsuitable.
23. In November, the Council accepted it owed Ms X the main housing duty. It also moved her to different temporary accommodation.

My findings

Taking an application - May 2019

24. Ms X first approached the Council in May 2019. The Council says it completed an assessment but did not take a homeless application because the risk to Ms X was ‘low’. However, the Council has no record of this assessment or what information Ms X provided.
25. Although in prison, Mr Z had a release date in September. He also continued to harass Ms X from prison. He did this by writing her letters, often via her neighbours.
26. Because of this behaviour, the police assessed the risk to Ms X as ‘medium’ despite Mr Z’s incarceration. In a letter to the Council, the police said that the risk would become ‘high’ immediately on Mr Z’s release.
27. In May, the Council should have considered whether it had reason to believe
    Ms X was threatened with homelessness. This bar is low. Given that Ms X was overcrowded in her 2-bedroom house, was experiencing ongoing harassment, and knew that Mr Z was due for release soon, there was reason to believe Ms X was threatened with homelessness. The Council should have taken an application. There is no evidence it did so. This is fault.
28. Having taken an application and assessed Ms X’s circumstances, the Council should then have considered what duty it owed Ms X. It could have decided she was ‘not homeless’ and issued a decision, which would have given Ms X review rights. However, the Code says councils should consider accepting a prevention duty at this point rather than telling the applicant to come back when homelessness is more imminent.
29. Ms X was dealing with the distress and fear caused by Mr Z’s ongoing harassment. This fear only got worse as the release date approached. If the Council had acted in May, and accepted a prevention duty, it would also have issued a Personalised Housing Plan (PHP). This would have set out the steps for Ms X and the Council to take to prevent her homelessness. This might have reassured Ms X that she would not be at risk when Mr Z came out of prison. Instead, she had to live with the uncertainty of not knowing if she would move in time, or if the Council would help her. This is an injustice to Ms X.

Relief duty - September 2019

30. Ms X came back to the Council in September 2019, when Mr Z’s release date was imminent. The Council assessed Ms X and provided interim accommodation.
31. At this point, the Council accepted Ms X was homeless. This means it owed her the relief duty. The Council must tell applicants in writing when it decides it owes a duty. The Council accepts it did not tell Ms X it owed her the relief duty. This is fault.

Personalised Housing Plan

32. The Council also accepts it did not complete a PHP with Ms X. This is fault. In its response to Ms X’s complaint, the Council said that at times it was taking action “behind the scenes” that Ms X might not have been aware of. If it had completed a PHP, however, Ms X would have known what she and the Council should do. Instead, Ms X felt as though nothing was happening. This is an injustice to Ms X.
33. Ms X was a housing association tenant. She says the Council advised her not to give up her tenancy when it placed her in interim accommodation. Ms X says the Council told her that if she surrendered her tenancy, she would be making herself intentionally homeless. Since then, Ms X says she received no further advice about what to do about her tenancy. As a result, Ms X says she has accrued debts, including substantial council tax arrears, on this tenancy.
34. The Council should have issued a PHP and kept it under review. It might have been appropriate for Ms X to maintain her tenancy for a short period while the Council assessed whether it could take steps to make it safe for her return. If so, this should have been recorded in the PHP.
35. However, Ms X has now been out of the property for over a year and the Council has accepted the main housing duty. As soon as the Council knew it was not intending for Ms X to return to the tenancy, it should have updated the PHP. At the very latest, it should have given her advice about her tenancy when it accepted the main duty to her. This would have enabled Ms X to make a timely and informed decision about whether to maintain her tenancy while in interim accommodation. Instead, she accrued avoidable debts. This is an injustice to
    Ms X.
36. In response to my enquiries, the Council says it is “confident that Ms [X] was informed of the responsibilities of her landlord and the Council regarding her tenancy.” However, without a PHP or any contemporaneous record of the advice given, there is no basis for the Ombudsman to share this confidence.

S188 interim accommodation

37. In September, the Council offered Ms X interim accommodation because it was satisfied she was homeless and had reason to believe she was in priority need.
38. The property offered by the Council to meet its duty was a three-bedroom property. Ms X has four children. The age and gender of the children mean the family needs a four-bedroom property. The Council says it considered the living area could function as a bedroom.
39. Ms X says the accommodation was not suitable. She says it was too small and in a very poor condition. The Council’s records show that Ms X told the Council one of her children had specific health needs requiring a separate bedroom.
40. Ms X sent me photographs of the accommodation. One of the bedrooms was demonstrably too small to fit a single bed into. There is no evidence the Council considered whether this would mean the property was large enough to meet
    Ms X’s needs. There is also no evidence the Council considered the information provided by Ms X about one child needing a separate bedroom. This is fault.
41. The Council’s records show that Ms X reported several issues with the accommodation. This included problems with the electrics, a leak, and mould so severe, Ms X says it made one bedroom uninhabitable. Ms X continued to report these problems to the Council throughout September and October.
42. The records show the Council did respond to Ms X’s concerns. And several officers visited the property. However, the Council relied on the landlord to complete the repairs, and many were not completed, as Ms X’s repeated reports of disrepair demonstrate.
43. The Council’s records suggest that its response to Ms X was to advise her to wait until it made a main duty decision and then request a suitability review of the accommodation. It should have considered whether the condition of the property meant it was unsuitable. There is no evidence it did so. This is fault.
44. As a result, Ms X and her children spent two months in interim accommodation that was too small for their needs and in a poor condition. This is an injustice to Ms X. The Council accepted the main duty and moved Ms X into different temporary accommodation in November 2019.

Agreed action

45. To remedy the injustice to Ms X from the faults I have identified, the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Ms X in writing
• Pay Ms X £500 for failing to take an application in May 2019
• Pay Ms X £500 for failing to consider the suitability of interim accommodation
• Immediately advise Ms X what to do about her housing association tenancy; and
• Meet the cost of any rent and council tax arrears on the property accrued since the Council accepted a main duty in November 2019.
46. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
47. The Council says it has already taken action to improve its services. This includes establishing a Domestic Abuse Hub with specialist Housing Officers as well as training for all staff on the subject. We welcome these improvements.
48. The Council should also take the following action to improve its services:
• Remind relevant staff of the requirements to issue decision letters and PHPs and provide further training as needed.
• Remind relevant staff of the advice and information relevant to tenants fleeing domestic violence.
49. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken within eight weeks of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

50. I have completed my investigation. There is fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman