Summary: Mr X complains the Council refused to house his family and failed to issue a formal decision not to house them. The Ombudsman upholds part of Mr X’s complaint. There was no fault in the Council’s decision not to house the family, but the Council failed to issue a formal decision or advise Mr X of his review rights. It will now do so.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council refused to provide him and his family with accommodation on the day he presented as homeless, despite saying previously it would do so. He says the Council has not issued a formal decision confirming it will not house them. The family are now homeless. He would like the Council to provide them with 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’. 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)
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 made by Mr X and the information he provided.
5. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and the documents it provided in response to my enquiries.
6. I took account of the Ombudsman’s focus report, ‘Home truths: how well are councils implementing the Homelessness Reduction Act?’ published in July 2020.
7. Mr 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

Background

8. 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.
9. If someone is homeless, or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, they can seek help from the Council. Where the person is threatened with homelessness, the prevention duty may apply. Where the person is already homeless, the relief duty may apply.
10. The prevention duty requires councils to help the applicant keep their accommodation or secure alternative accommodation to move in a planned way. The relief duty requires councils to help an applicant secure accommodation for at least six months.
11. The Council will carry out an assessment and work with the person to develop a personalised housing plan. If the Council has reason to believe a person may be homeless, eligible and in priority need then it must provide interim accommodation for them. A person may be in priority need if they have dependent children.
12. Section 198 of the Housing Act enables a council to refer applicants who do not have a local connection to their area to another council where they do have such a connection. Once an applicant has been notified of the referral, the referring council is no longer subject to the relief duty. The Council must write to the applicant twice: once when it decides to refer, and again once a decision has been made about whether the referral conditions are met.
13. In this Council, a local connection includes:
• living there for at least five years;
• needing to move there to take up or continue in permanent employment; or
• giving or receiving care or support from a family member who is already resident.
14. The Council must put all key decisions in writing and give reasons for any negative decisions. Many decisions come with a right to request a review. Applicants cannot request a review of the Council’s decision to refer their case to another council at the relief duty stage. They can request to review a decision about whether referral conditions have been met.
15. In the focus report, ‘Home truths: how well are councils implementing the Homelessness Reduction Act?’ the Ombudsman highlighted the importance of councils telling applicants of their right to ask for a review of councils’ decisions.

What happened

16. Mr X and his family lived in another council area, Council B, for three years. He was given a deadline to leave his accommodation by 6 February 2020. His wife approach Lewisham Council [‘the Council’] in January 2020 to ask about the family’s housing options, because this is where they had lived previously.
17. The Council sent Mrs X a personalised housing plan the next day. This showed the Council had discussed Mrs X’s housing options with her, which included searching for affordable private rented accommodation. The Council also said it could refer Mrs X to other schemes to support her and Mr X with employment and housing. The plan notes Mrs X would discuss the options with her husband and let the Council know if she wanted it to refer.
18. The Council noted in the personalised housing plan that Mrs X had no local connection to Lewisham, because she had been living in Council B. It said the housing officer would explain to Mrs X that the Council would refer them to Council B. Mrs X disagreed with this part of the plan because she wanted to live in Lewisham.
19. Alongside the plan, the Council served Mrs X with a notice that she was eligible for assistance under the prevention duty, as she was threatened with homelessness. The notice set out the circumstances in which the Council could end its duty.
20. In the covering email which accompanied the plan, the housing officer said:
• Mrs X would not be eligible to register for a local social housing scheme because she did not have a local connection to Lewisham.
• she would refer Mrs X’s case to Council B.
• even if the Council was to provide Mrs X with temporary accommodation, their case would still be referred to Council B, as this is where they had a local connection.
• Mrs X could search for a rental property in the area and the Council may provide a deposit and rent in advance for the property, subject to checks.
21. On 4 February, the Council made a referral under section 198 to Council B. It sent a copy to Mrs X, telling her of its decision to refer.
22. On the same day, the housing officer spoke to Mrs X. The family had decided to leave their accommodation in Council B two days early and were staying with family in another part of London. The Council says it advised Mrs X that she did not have a local connection to the area and her case was being referred to Council B. Mrs X was unhappy about this as she wanted to live in Lewisham and not in Council B.
23. Council B accepted the referral the next day and the Council provided Mrs X’s contact details. The Council did not issue any further notice.
24. Mr X attended the Council’s offices on 6 February. He was advised that a referral had been made to Council B which had accepted a temporary duty to house his family. Mr X said he did not want to go to Council B, and it was too late to travel. The Council agreed to provide emergency accommodation for one night with the expectation Mr X would travel to Council B in the morning.
25. Mr X attended the Council’s offices again on 7 February and sought temporary accommodation. The manager present explained that he needed to approach Council B. Mr X said he could not afford the journey to Council B, so the manager offered to help with the family’s travelling expenses. Mr X again said it was too late to travel that day. The manager offered a further night in emergency accommodation with travel assistance the following day. Mr X refused both offers, insisting he wanted the Council to provide temporary accommodation. The family stayed with relatives and friends.
26. On 12 February, Mrs X contacted the Council asking if it would provide a deposit and rent in advance for a property in the area. The Council said it would not help her because Council B had accepted a duty to house her and her family. It said she could approach Council B to seek support.
27. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

28. The Council’s personalised housing plan and communication in January 2020 were clear that it would not be responsible for housing Mr and Mrs X and their family. There is no evidence the Council told Mr and Mrs X that it would provide accommodation once they left their home.
29. There was no fault in the Council’s decision to refer Mr X and his family to Council B. The family did not meet the criteria for a local connection to the Council. It completed the referral correctly and told Mrs X about it. At this point the Council’s relief duty ended and it was not required to provide interim accommodation.
30. However, the Council failed to send a second notice to Mr X once Council B had agreed the conditions for referral had been met. This was fault and deprived Mr X of the opportunity to seek a review of the Council’s decision.
31. There was no fault in the way the Council provided emergency accommodation and offered further support to Mr X to allow him to return to Council B to seek temporary housing.
32. If Mr X’s circumstances have changed and he has secured permanent work in the area, he can make a fresh application to the join the Council’s housing register.

Back to top

Agreed action

33. Within four weeks of this decision, the Council will:
• apologise to Mr X for failing to issue the second notice and pay him £100 for his time and trouble in pursing the complaint.
• issue the second notice to Mr and Mrs X, including information about how to exercise their right to request a review.
• review all referrals made under section 198 at the relief duty stage in the previous 12 months. The Council will ensure it issued both the first and second notice correctly. Where the Council has failed to issue a second notice, it will do so without delay and reinstate an applicant’s right to request a review.
• remind officers making referrals under section 198 at the relief duty stage of the need to issue two notices and that the second notice must advise applicants of their right to request a review.

Final decision

34. I do not uphold Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to provide his family with accommodation. I uphold his complaint about the Council’s failure to issue a formal decision. Mr X has been caused an injustice by the actions of the Council and it will take action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman