Summary: We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that the Council failed to look after her belongings properly when she was homeless. This is because even if we exercised discretion to consider Miss B’s complaint and found fault by the Council, there is not enough evidence for us to safely establish the losses and damage she has described are a result of that fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss B, complained that the Council failed to look after her belongings properly when she was homeless. As a result she said some items had been lost or damaged.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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)
4. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
5. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have considered the information Miss B provided. Miss B has had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. In December 2020 the Council offered interim emergency accommodation to Miss B. She moved her possessions into the accommodation but on the following day she withdrew her homelessness application. The Council ended her licence agreement for the property on the same day. Miss B told us she asked a housing options officer to look after her possessions until after she had been paid. When it responded to Miss B’s complaint the Council said it had placed her belongings in bags and put them into a garage.
8. Miss B arrived to collect her belongings just over a month after she had left them. The Council said she had not made a pre-arranged appointment. Ten days later she made a complained through her MP that some of her belongings had been stolen and some had been damaged. She claimed £2000 compensation from the Council.
9. The Council did not agree to pay compensation to Miss B. It said this was because:

• she did not keep to her licence conditions;
• she did not arrange contents insurance;
• she did not stay overnight at the accommodation;
• her son had entered the property with a social worker and the social worker had confirmed her son had removed some items;
• she had not replied to requests to remove her belongings within seven days;
• she had arrived without an appointment to collect her belongings in January 2020 and taken them with her;
• she had taken photographs of the alleged damage ten days after collecting the items;
• there were inconsistencies in her accounts of what happened and in her correspondence; and
• the housing options officer had said she did not speak to him about storing her possessions.

10. Section 211 of the Housing Act 1996 says where a council is subject to a duty to provide interim accommodation to a homeless applicant, it must take reasonable steps to prevent the loss of a homeless applicant’s property or prevent or mitigate damage to it. The duty to someone’s belongings can continue even after the Council no longer has a duty to accommodate that person.
11. Section 212 of the Housing Act 1996 says the duty to someone’s belongings ends in one of two ways. One is when an applicant asks the Council to move their belongings to a suitable location they have nominated. The other is if the Council has good reason to believe there is no longer any danger of the applicant’s belongings being lost or damaged.
12. Miss B wants the Council to pay her for the loss and damage she has claimed. Before deciding whether to investigate this complaint, we must consider whether Miss B can and should take legal action against the Council instead. Liability for loss and damage to possessions is a legal matter. A court of law is the appropriate body to rule on legal matters in the event of a dispute. If someone is complaining of damage to or loss of possessions while in storage the Council arranged, we would normally say it is not unreasonable to expect the complainant to make a claim for damages in the county court. Miss B has told us she is in poor health. But, even if we exercised discretion to consider Miss B’s complaint and found fault by the Council, there is not enough evidence for us to safely establish the losses and damage she has described are a result of that fault.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because even if we exercised discretion to consider Miss B’s complaint and found fault by the Council, there is not enough evidence for us to safely establish the losses and damage she has described are a result of that fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman