Westminster City Council (20 010 503)
Category : Housing > Homelessness
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 04 Mar 2021
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint about how the Council managed his housing situation after he became homeless. This is because it was not unreasonable to expect Mr C to have gone to court to appeal the Council’s decision.
The complaint
- The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr C, complains about the way the Council handled his housing situation after he became homeless.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
- 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)
How I considered this complaint
- I have considered Mr C’s complaint and the Council’s response. I have invited Mr C to comment on a draft version of this decision.
What I found
What happened
- In May 2020, Mr C submitted a homeless application to the Council.
- The Council rejected Mr C’s application on the grounds that it did not consider him to be in priority need. Mr C requested a review of the Council’s decision.
- In November 2020, the Council completed its review. It agreed that Mr C was not in priority need and therefore the Council did not have a duty to house him.
- The Council wrote to Mr C informing him of the outcome of its review and explained that he had the right to seek an appeal to the county court within 21 days.
Assessment
- I will not investigate Mr C’s complaint. This is because he had the right to seek an appeal to the county court after the Council had completed the review of its decision.
- We do not have the power to decide if anyone is of priority need, nor do we have the power to decide who should be housed.
- The Council informed him of his right to appeal, and it was not unreasonable to expect Mr C to have used it. The county court has powers that we do not have so it was the appropriate body to consider Mr C’s appeal.
Final decision
- We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is not unreasonable to expect Mr C to have gone to court to appeal the Council’s decision.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman