Summary: The complainant says the Council failed to properly manage her housing application leading to a delay in the offer of a permanent home. The Council accepts fault in managing the applications. The Ombudsman finds the Council acted with fault causing an injustice for which he recommends a remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I refer to as Ms X complains the Council did not properly consider her homelessness and housing applications resulting in a delay to an offer of permanent housing.
2. Ms X says she had to move often between temporary accommodation. This, she says, caused inconvenience and expense in extending her commute to work and getting her son to school. Therefore, Ms X wants the Council to pay her commuting costs between 2016 and 2019 and to review its procedures to prevent other families experiencing the same delays.

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. In considering this complaint I have:
• Contacted Ms X through her representative and read the information presented with her complaint;
• Put enquiries to the Council and studied its response;
• Researched the relevant law, guidance, and policy;
• Shared with Ms X’s representative and the Council my draft decision and I have reflected on any comments received.

Back to top

What I found

The law, guidance, and policy

6. 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) 
7. Where a council has ‘reason to believe’ a person may be homeless, eligible and n priority need then it must provide them with interim accommodation.
8. The Council must decide whether it owes the person a duty to house them. If satisfied the applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need the Council must arrange accommodation. (housing Act 1996, section 193, and Homelessness Code of Guidance).
9. The Council must give all key decisions in writing and give reasons for any negative decisions. Applicants usually have a right to ask for a review of decisions.
10. Where the Council arranges accommodation, it must be suitable for the person and those who can reasonably be expected to live with them. (Housing Act 1996, section 206).
11. 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)
12. Councils may only use bed and breakfast accommodation for households which include a pregnant woman or dependent child when no other accommodation is available. Councils may not use it for more than six weeks.  Bed and breakfast accommodation consists of accommodation which is not self-contained, not owned by the Council or a registered provider of social housing and where the toilet, washing, or cooking facilities are shared with other households.  (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003 and from 3 April 2018 Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.32)
13. Councils must consider the accommodation’s location when they consider if it is suitable for the applicant and members of their household. If a council places an applicant outside its district, it must consider, among other matters:
• the distance of the accommodation from the “home” district;
• the significance of any disruption to the education of members of the applicant’s household;
• the proximity and accessibility to local services, amenities and transport. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2012)
14. Homeless applicants may ask for a review within 21 days of the decision on their application.
15. Government guidance gives advice to councils on how to meet their homelessness and housing duties.
16. Under the Council’s housing allocations policy, the Council suspends an applicant’s right to bid for vacant homes if they have rent arrears.
17. The Ombudsman recognises the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. He may not find fault with a council for failing to re-house someone if the Council has given due priority to applicants and allocated properties according to its published lettings scheme policy.

What happened

Homeless application and decision

18. In June 2016 Ms X applied for housing as a homeless person. The Council says it issued a decision in July 2016 under Section 184 Housing Act 1996 accepting Ms X as a homeless applicant to whom it owed a housing duty. Ms X says she did not receive this letter and so did not know the Council had accepted it had a duty to house her. Without the letter Ms X did not know she could bid for a permanent home or ask for a review of any decision.
19. The Council provided temporary accommodation for Ms X between 2016 and her successful bid for permanent social housing with the Council in March 2019.

Suspension of bidding rights

20. Ms X says she did not bid for vacant homes between 2016 and 2018 because she had not received her decision letter. Ms X then contacted an advice agency who explained to her what should happen when applying for housing. In January 2018 Ms X asked the Council to explain the suspension. There is no record of what the Council said in response.
21. Ms X complained to the Council in October 2018. In her complaint Ms X asked why the Council had suspended her bidding rights. In reply the Council said its records showed Ms X had rent arrears between 2016 and 2018. The Council says it suspended Ms X’s bidding rights because she had arrears as set out in its housing allocations policy.
22. In response to my enquiries the Council says its records show that it did not clearly explain this to Ms X by issuing her with a letter explaining the decision and outlining how she could challenge it. The Council in recognition of this fault offers a payment of £375 in line with its policy on remedies.

Temporary accommodation

23. Ms X says the Council misled her on what she would have to pay for temporary accommodation. When she received the rent demands she found it difficult to pay because it was some £30 more than she had expected. This led her to incur rent arrears. The Council says it has no record to support Ms X’s assertion, and it offered temporary accommodation in line with its usual policy and procedure.
24. Ms X says the Council housed her and her son in hostel accommodation (which is in housing terms the same as bed and breakfast) from June to October 2016. This lasted eight weeks longer than the six-week limit for families in hostel or bed and breakfast accommodation.
25. The Council recognised that it offered temporary accommodation outside its district. That, Ms X says meant she had to live a long way from her workplace and her son’s school resulting in added travel expenses and inconvenience. Ms x wants the Council to pay for the commuting expenses she incurred.
26. Between June 2016 and March 2019 Ms X lived in three different homes as temporary accommodation before moving to a permanent home in March 2019.

Priority star

27. Ms X asked the Council to assess her eligibility for a priority star and the Council awarded her a priority star in December 2018. Priority stars give added priority to an applicant and so increase the chances of successfully bidding on vacant homes. The Council awards priority stars to certain homeless applicants and says it should have awarded the priority star when it accepted it had a duty to house Ms X in July 2016. However, the Council says because of the rent arrears which prevented Ms X bidding on vacant homes until 2018 the lack of a priority star has not impacted on her ability to bid successfully for a home.

Complaint to the Council

28. In October 2018 Ms X complained to the Council about the Council’s handling of her housing application. The Council responded in November 2018. It said, in error, it had issued a formal homelessness decision letter in August 2016, when in fact it issued the decision in July 2016. The Council sent a copy of the letter and outlined how Ms X may achieve a priority star.
29. Not satisfied with the Council’s response Ms X asked the Council to consider her complaint at stage two of the Council’s complaints procedure in December 2018. Ms X said she still had not received her priority star award and the Council had not addressed her concern that she had experienced disadvantage through the two-year delay in issuing her decision letter. Ms X said this meant she did not know the Council had accepted her as homeless or that she had a right to bid for property or ask for a review of decisions.
30. The Council responded to the stage 2 complaint in January 2019. The Council confirmed it had awarded the priority star in December 2018 but should have provided it when it accepted the housing duty. The Council had reviewed Ms X’s bidding history and said the priority star would not have resulted in her successfully bidding for a property. The Council apologised for the distress caused by the faults identified but did not offer any other remedy. It has in response to my enquiries offered a payment of £375.

Analysis – has there been fault causing injustice?

31. My role is to decide if the Council has managed the housing application without fault. If not, then I must consider what impact the fault has had and what the Council should do to put it right. My role is not to decide the merits of the applications or judge the suitability of temporary housing.
32. The Council accepted a housing duty because Ms X presented as unintentionally homeless and in priority need in July 2016. Ms X never received the Council’s decision letter. The Council believes it posted the letter. With the passage of time it is impossible to say why Ms X did not receive the letter.
33. Ms X moved several times while awaiting a permanent home. That unfortunately is the nature of temporary accommodation. The Council has a duty to house but not a duty to house someone in the same accommodation until they find a permanent home.
34. However, in placing Ms X and her son in a hostel between June and October 2016 the Council exceeded the six weeks allowed by eight weeks. I find that a fault which caused an injustice. According to the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies where a council places a family in bed and breakfast accommodation for longer than six weeks, we will usually recommend a payment. I have applied that guidance.
35. The Council has not shown what consideration it gave to the temporary accommodation’s location when it placed Ms X out of borough. Councils may place applicants in accommodation out of their administrative area if they cannot find any other suitable accommodation. However, I find the Council at fault for not having records showing how it considered the likely impact on Ms X and her son or how it communicated that decision to her. The Council offered homes in the London region with travel links to the City. I have seen no evidence that suggests the Council would have reached a different decision on suitability of location but for the faults I have found. However, we will never know and that creates an injustice.
36. In response to my enquiries the Council recognises fault in the lack of records showing how it communicated decisions to Ms X, or how it identified if she needed translation services. I find the Council at fault for poor record keeping.
37. The Council did not award the priority star in July 2016 when it should. I find the Council at fault for that failure.
38. The impact of the failures on Ms X are delay in the award of the priority star, and an explanation of how the procedure should work and what she could expect. The Council has shown arrears on the rent account for each of the temporary homes led to a suspension of Ms X’s bidding rights between 2016 and 2018. I find the Council acted without fault in suspending Ms X’s bidding rights. However, I find the Council acted with fault in not issuing a letter explaining to Ms X why it had suspended those rights. The letter would provide Ms X with information on how to challenge the decision, ask for a review and may have led her to clear the arrears earlier. That would enable her to bid on vacant homes earlier. Whether this would have led to a successful bid we will never know and that, creates an injustice.

Recommended and agreed action

39. To address the injustice arising from the faults I have identified I recommend, and the Council agrees to, within four weeks of this my final decision:
• Apologise to Ms X in writing for the mistakes;
• Pay Ms X £400 in recognition of the distress caused by remaining in bed and breakfast accommodation for eight weeks longer than she should;
• Pay Ms X £100 in recognition of the impact of the faults on Ms X and the doubt this caused;
• Share with staff my decision to alert them to the errors and remind them of the duties the Council owes applicants.

Back to top

Final decision

40. In completing my investigation, I find the Council acted with fault in its management of Ms X’s housing applications causing her an injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman