Summary: Ms X complains the Council was at fault in the way it dealt with her housing situation since 2018 and a homelessness application. We found fault as the Council delayed in deciding whether it owed Ms X a main housing duty and it failed to set up a rent account for storing her belongings. But these faults have not caused Ms X an injustice, so we have completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I shall refer to as Ms X complains there were failings in the way the Council dealt with her housing situation since 2018 and a homelessness application. Ms X complains this has caused her distress and financial difficulties. In particular Ms X says:
• The Council has kept her family in unsuitable and overcrowded hostel accommodation for three years, and failed to deal with damp, mould and other repair issues which have affected their health.
• Her homelessness caseworkers did not keep her properly informed about her case and did not respond to her contacts.
• The Council has not responded to her queries about the storage of her possessions since 2018 and any charges for storage.
• The Council has not taken enough account of her long-term depressive illness in deciding in her case.
• The Council has unreasonably failed to help her obtain affordable housing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. The courts have said that where someone has used their right of appeal, reference or review or remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)
4. 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)
5. 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

6. I have read the papers submitted by Ms X and spoken to her about the complaint. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and the supporting documents it provided.
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

Legislation and statutory 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)

Intentionally homeless

19. A person becomes intentionally homeless if he/she deliberately does or fails to do anything in consequence of which they cease to occupy accommodation which is available for their occupation and which it would have been reasonable for them to continue to occupy.

Protection of belongings

20. Where the council owes or has owed certain housing duties to an applicant, it must protect the applicant’s personal property if there is a risk it may be lost or damaged. A council may make a reasonable charge for storage and reserve the right to dispose of the property if it loses contact with the applicant. (Housing Act 1996, section 211, Homelessness Code of Guidance chapter 20)

Background to the complaint

21. Ms X and her two children moved into a three bedroomed property in 2015 rented from a housing provider. The housing provider referred Ms X to the Council in October 2017 as she was facing eviction because of rent arrears. The Council allocated the case to a caseworker the same day. Ms X was registered with Homefinder UK who source social housing outside of London. Ms X told the caseworker she had arrears of over £10,000. Between January and March 2018, the caseworker liaised with the housing provider and the Council’s Housing Benefit team. This was to see if Ms X was entitled to any backdated housing benefit to help with the arrears and prevent the eviction.
22. Ms X received some extra housing benefit but not enough to cover the accumulated arrears of £13,000 and the housing provider served a notice of eviction on Ms X for 25 April 2018. Ms X applied to the Council as homeless. The Council accepted a relief duty towards Ms X on the day of her application and explained it had 56 days to take reasonable steps to prevent her homelessness or find her alternative accommodation. The Council sent Ms X an outline of the reasonable steps it intended to take and a Personal Housing Plan. The Council booked Ms X into a hostel run by a different housing provider while it investigated her homeless application. The Council arranged the removal and storage of her possessions for the day of eviction.
23. Ms X signed a contract to store her goods with an initial charge of £150 and then £2 a week. Ms X and her two children moved to the hostel into a three-bed unit.
24. Ms X complained of disrepair at the hostel to the housing provider on 30 April 2018. This included a blocked shower drain, silverfish around the shower basin, the oven not working and a broken window handle. The Council received a further complaint about disrepair from solicitors acting for Ms X in May 2018 and Ms X requested a review of the accommodation’s suitability. The Council told Ms X she was not entitled to a review as she was in interim accommodation. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaints and confirmed the work taken to repair the issues she raised. Ms X contacted the caseworker about disrepair at the accommodation in June 2018. The caseworker advised Ms X to look for affordable privately rented accommodation.
25. In November 2018, the case worker told Ms X the Council considered it had complied with the relief duty and it had ended. The caseworker said she would make S 184 enquiries into Ms X’s homelessness application to see if the Council owed her a full housing duty or not. The caseworker said the Council would review Ms X’s files and decide.
26. The Council allocated Ms X’s case to a different caseworker in May 2019. The caseworker contacted Ms X and her former housing provider for information. The caseworker sent Ms X a letter on 1 July 2019 saying the Council was ‘minded to’ find she was intentionally homeless from her previous property.
27. Ms X complained to the Council in September 2019 about her temporary accommodation and the way it dealt with her homelessness application. Ms X raised concerns she was sharing a room with her children at the hostel and there was mould at the accommodation causing a health issue for the family. Ms X said she had been allocated a caseworker in April 2018 and was still waiting for a decision. Ms X said she had not been sent details about bidding for properties.
28. The Council responded to Ms X and recognised her accommodation was not ideal. But unfortunately, it was often necessary to overcrowd families in temporary accommodation. The Council said it would refer the mould issue to the housing provider for further investigation.
29. The Council apologised for the delay in dealing with her case which was due to her caseworker going on long term sick leave. The Council confirmed it had reallocated her case to another caseworker and it would shortly make a decision. The Council said it tried to make decision soon as it could after the 56 days of relief duty ends, but it could take longer with complex cases.
30. The Council confirmed Ms X could only bid for housing if it accepted a full housing duty towards her. The Council said it was likely to consider she had made herself intentionally homeless due to her rent arrears. But it was making enquiries on her case. The Council was aware she had provided information to her previous caseworker, but the new caseworker also needed to ask her for information.
31. The Council advised Ms X there was a high demand for housing in the borough so suggested she look for private rented accommodation. The Council said it may be able to help her with a deposit and/or rent in advance to secure a property.
32. The Council wrote to Ms X on 22 October 2019 as it had completed its enquiries into her homelessness application made in April 2018. The Council said it considered she was eligible for assistance, homeless and in priority need but it found her intentionally homeless. The Council explained the reasons for its decision. This was because it considered the accommodation was available for her to occupy and affordable to her. The Council said Ms X had not paid the rent and failed to notify housing benefit when she stopped working. The Council said she had a history of not engaging with her landlord over the issues. The Council found Ms X had not been treated for depression or attended counselling so did not consider her vulnerable due to limited mental capacity. The Council noted her children did not have any impairments.
33. The Council referred Ms X’s case to its Children and Families team in its social services due to the intentionally homeless decision and impact on Ms X’s children. The Council told Ms X it would end her tenancy at the hostel and had a duty to provide her with advice and assistance in any attempts she made to secure accommodation. The Council said it had a duty to secure accommodation for a time to give her a reasonable opportunity of securing accommodation. The Council agreed to allow her 28 days and advised it was under no further duty to provide her with any temporary or permanent accommodation after that. The Council told Ms X she could request a review of its decision.
34. Ms X asked for a review of the decision in November 2019 and submitted a medical form with supporting information. Ms X explained her situation arose due to issues with her mental health when the debts occurred. Ms X said she told a case worker in 2015 she considered the property unaffordable when she signed for it. The Council reviewed Ms X’s case in December 2019. The Council told Ms X it considered Ms X homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need. But as she had made herself intentionally homeless it did not consider it had a housing duty towards her. The Council said it was ‘minded to’ find her intentionally homeless.
35. Ms X appealed to the county court about the Council’s decision in March 2020. The court upheld the Council’s decision but told Ms X the Council could not currently evict her due to rules about not doing so during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Council issued a final decision on Ms X’s homelessness application in May 2020 and confirmed its decision it considered her intentionally homeless.

Events since Ms X’s complaint to us

36. Ms X was evicted from the hostel in June 2020. Ms X considers the Council did not correctly notify her of its decision as she did not receive a letter. The Council agreed to delay the eviction by a few days. Ms X says the Council provided temporary accommodation for her and her younger child out of the borough but could not house her older child due to their age.

The Council’s response to the complaint

37. The Council confirms Ms X would have been told when she signed for the hostel that she needed to raise any issues at the hostel with the housing provider who ran it. The Council says Ms X did raise issues and these were dealt with by the housing provider. The actions are confirmed in the Council’s responses to Ms X’s complaints in 2018.
38. The Council says the hostel accommodation allocated to Ms X was a self-contained three bed unit considered suitable for temporary accommodation. The Council considered the hostel unit the correct size for Ms X and her family and their medical needs.
39. The Council says Ms X accrued rent arrears while at the hostel as she did not pay her service charges. It says the normal procedure is for hostel staff to advise clients there is a service charge to pay when signing up. However, the housing provide confirms Ms X’s rent account was in credit when closed on 14 June 2021 and from March 2021 Ms X paid the charges in advance.
40. The Council says Ms X told a mental health adviser in January 2021 she had been paying £2.00 a week to store her belongings while in hostel accommodation. The Council confirms Ms X signed an agreement for it to store her goods when she moved into the hostel. Under the agreement the Council sets up a rent account and gives the person a rent card to make the storage payments. But in Ms X’s case the Council acknowledges it did not set up a storage account for her. The Council has not expected Ms X to pay for storage as it was not her error that it did not set up the account.

Assessment

41. The evidence provided shows the Council dealt with Ms X’s homelessness application as we would expect in April 2018 according to the Code. The Council moved Ms X into temporary accommodation while it considered her homeless application. The Council decided to end the relief duty in November 2018. There is no evidence of fault by the Council to this point.
42. The Council told Ms X it would make enquiries to see if owed her a full housing duty. Previously it was recommended that Councils take 33 working days to make such a decision. The new Code does not give a timescale, but we would expect a council to make a decision within a reasonable timeframe. After the relief duty has ended there is an expectation a council makes a decision 15 days after the duty ends.
43. The documents show the Council took from November 2018 to October 2019 to decide Ms X’s application and whether it owed her a main housing duty. The Council accepts the delay and there was no action until May 2019 as Ms X’s caseworker was on sick leave. It then took from May to October 2019 to make a decision due to work pressures on officers.
44. So, I consider there was fault by the Council as it delayed in deciding whether it owed Ms X a main housing duty. But I do not consider the delay has caused a significant injustice to Ms X to warrant recommending the Council makes a financial payment to her as a remedy. This is because the Council has eventually decided it does not owe Ms X the main housing duty. And Ms X has been provided with interim accommodation throughout the process which mitigates any injustice she has suffered.
45. In commenting on the draft decision, the Council says since this case its Housing services have undergone a major reorganisation which is designed to delineate its responsibilities to customers throughout their homeless application. This should provide a better customer service and mitigate any human error such as overlooking storage accounts.
46. The Council confirmed it considered the accommodation suitable for Ms X and her family as it was a three-bed self-contained unit. Ms X raised complaints about repair issues at the unit and the evidence shows these were dealt with by the housing provider in 2018.
47. The Council decided it did not owe Ms X a main housing duty as she had made herself intentionally homeless. Ms X appealed to the county court about the Council’s decision. The court upheld the Council’s decision. While Ms X may disagree with the Council’s decision it is not one we can consider because Ms X has used her right to appeal to the courts as paragraph three explains.
48. The Council’s documents show did consider the mental health issues Ms X raised. But the Council did not consider the issues enough to prevent it making a finding Ms X had made herself intentionally homeless. This part of Ms X’s complaint has been considered during the court hearing into her appeal against the Council’s decision so it is not an issue we can consider.
49. The Council agreed to store Ms X’s belongings for her when she moved into the hostel and told Ms X it would set up a rent account for her. Ms X says the Council has not responded to her enquiries about the storage, but I have found no evidence Ms X made enquiries until December 2019. The Council accepted it did not set up an account for her, so she is not expected to pay the storage costs.
50. I consider there is fault by the Council as it did not set up a rent account for Ms X to pay for her storage costs. But as the Council has not expected her to pay the costs, I do not consider Ms X has suffered any significant injustice to warrant me recommending a financial payment to her as a remedy.
51. Ms X complained the Council failed to find her affordable housing. The documents provided show the Council advised Ms X to look for privately rented accommodation and it would see if it could offer her assistance. There is no evidence to show Ms X has acted on the Council’s advice.
52. Ms X has complained about recent events around her eviction from the interim accommodation and moving in new temporary accommodation . As these are recent events Ms X needs to complain to the Council first about these issues and complete the Council’s complaints procedure. It is then open to Ms X to pursue a further complaint to us about these matters.

Back to top

Final decision

53. I am completing my investigation. I have found fault by the Council as it delayed deciding whether it owed Ms X a main housing duty and failed to set up a rent account for her storage costs. But these faults have not caused a significant injustice to Ms X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman