Summary: There is no fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr X’s homelessness in 2018. The Council started a new homelessness assessment in March 2020 due a change in Mr X’s housing situation and issued decisions in line with the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance and so there is no fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the service at a homeless hostel run by a charity. He says staff at the hostel failed to assist him to move on through the clearing house scheme. He also complains about staff attitudes towards him, about inadequate facilities and about a failure to move him to a different room after he complained about antisocial behaviour. Mr X says the hostel acted unreasonably by evicting him.
2. Mr X also complains London Borough of Tower Hamlets (the Council) did not provide appropriate support when he applied to it as a homeless person.
3. Mr X says the Council’s fault meant he was in the hostel for too long and was eventually made homeless.

Back to top

What I have investigated

4. I have investigated the second complaint. My reason for not investigating the first complaint is at the end of this statement.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as registered social landlords. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34A, as amended)
6. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))
7. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
8. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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

9. I considered Mr X’s complaint to us, correspondence from the Mayor about the complaint and documents from Mr X and the Council described in the next section of this statement. I discussed the complaint with Mr X.
10. 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

Relevant law and guidance

11. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the Code of Guidance) set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance is statutory guidance on how councils should carry out their functions and they must have regard to it.
12. If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must take a homelessness application and make inquiries. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5) 
13. A person is homeless if they do not have accommodation that they are entitled to occupy, which is accessible and physically available to them (and their household) and which it would be reasonable for them to continue to live in. (Housing Act 1996, section 175)
14. 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. This is called the interim housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
15. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. This is known as the assessment duty. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment and should work with an applicant 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 set out to the applicant in a written personalised housing plan (PHP). (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)
16. Councils must take reasonable steps to secure accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This is called the relief duty. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must tell the applicant in writing. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
17. If 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. Councils refer to applicants in this situation as being owed ‘the main housing duty.’ (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
18. Councils should not delay completing their inquiries as to what further duties will be owed after the relief duty. Where a council has the information it requires to make a decision as to whether the applicant is in priority need and became homeless unintentionally, it should be possible to notify the applicant on or around day 57. In cases where significant further investigations are required it is recommended that housing authorities aim to complete their inquiries and notify the applicant of their decision within a maximum of 15 working days after 56 days have passed. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 14.16)
19. Applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of various homeless decisions including about the main housing duty and ending the relief duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 202)

What happened

20. Mr X was put in touch with the Council’s housing options service in October 2018 through a hub run by a homeless charity. He had been sleeping rough.
21. In the middle of October, the Council completed an assessment and wrote to Mr X saying he was threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance. The Council’s letter explained it owed Mr X the prevention duty. At the end of October, the Council accepted the relief duty and interim housing duty and a housing options officer wrote to him to confirm this. The Council placed Mr X in Bed and Breakfast.
22. A charity worker completed a supported housing common referral form for Mr X. The form said Mr X had no fixed abode and had been sleeping rough in Tower Hamlets since April 2018 and had previously lived with a relative in a different borough. The form noted Mr X had never lived independently and would like to learn how to manage a tenancy.
23. A housing options officer wrote to Mr X at the end of October 2018 saying he had been referred to the Council’s hostel pathway and placed on the waiting list. The letter explained:
• he would be required to follow a support programme in the hostel to enable him to gain life skills to live independently.
• he would need to keep to the rules which included claiming housing benefit and paying charges due.
• Once he had completed a support programme, he would be able to move on from the hostel through the clearing house project, run by a homeless charity. The hostel would provide more information about this.
• He needed to engage with support at the hostel.
24. Mr X moved into the hostel when a place became available in November 2018. The Council discharged the relief duty and wrote to Mr X to tell him this in December 2018. The letter explained Mr X had a right of review.
25. Mr X provided me with copies of his rent account records which indicate he accrued rent arrears of several thousand pounds during his time at the hostel. He said some of this was due to problems with housing benefit.
26. Mr X contacted the Council’s Housing Options Pathway Manager in the middle of December 2019 to raise the same concerns as in his complaint to us. The manager arranged for Mr X to see a substance misuse officer and advised Mr X to use the hostel’s complaints procedure if he wanted to make a formal complaint.
27. Internal emails between staff at the hostel indicate staff met with Mr X in January 2020 to discuss his concerns, housing benefit issues and arrears. A staff member from the hostel emailed Mr X after the meeting to say his clearing house application could only be submitted once and he needed to take some actions including paying his rent and meeting with specialist support.
28. In January 2020, Mr X contacted the Mayor about his concerns. The Mayor’s response said the Council could not respond to Mr X’s complaint about the hostel and he should use the hostel’s complaints procedure.
29. The hostel gave Mr X one week’s notice in March. Mr X complained to us and although he had not complained to the Council, we decided to investigate the complaint in view of his imminent eviction. Mr X was evicted from the hostel in March.
30. The Council completed a housing assessment, accepted the relief duty, issued Mr X with a relief notification letter and a PHP. The PHP said Mr X was not eligible for interim housing. The Council wrote to Mr X in March to say he was not in priority need and so it did not owe him the main housing duty. It explained his review and appeal rights. Mr X told us he had a solicitor and was going to challenge the Council’s decisions.

Was there fault and if so, did this cause injustice requiring a remedy?

The Council did not provide appropriate support when Mr X applied for housing as a homeless person.

31. In October 2018, the Council started assessments of Mr X’s homelessness and placed him in interim housing. It accepted the relief duty and ended the duty in December 2018 one he had moved into hostel accommodation. These actions were in line with the Housing Act 1996 and Code of Guidance described in paragraphs 11 to 19. The intention was for Mr X to move on from the hostel to longer term housing through the clearing house scheme run by a group of charities/housing associations. This did not happen. The Council did not run the hostel or the clearing house scheme and so I have no power to investigate complaints about it.
32. Although the Council was not responsible for the hostel’s actions, I am satisfied the Council acted without fault when Mr X contacted a council manager about the problems in January 2020. A substance misuse officer met with Mr X to try and resolve some areas of dispute, but ultimately, the Council had no control over the hostel including its decision to evict Mr X.
33. When Mr X had a new episode of homelessness in March 2020, the Council started a new assessment of homelessness, accepted the relief duty and issued a decision that Mr X was not in priority need. The correspondence explained his review and appeal rights. These actions are in line with the Housing Act 1996 and Code of Guidance and so there is no fault.

Back to top

Final decision

34. There is no fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr X’s homelessness in 2018. The Council started a new homeless assessment in March 2020 due a change in Mr X’s housing situation and issued decisions in line with the law and guidance.
35. I have completed the investigation.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

36. I did not investigate the first complaint because it is about housing management services provided by a registered social landlord (RSL). RSLs are not bodies that we can investigate.
37. The landlord is a member of the Housing Ombudsman’s scheme. Mr X can complain to the Housing Ombudsman who may decide whether or not to investigate his complaints about the hostel.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman