Summary: There was fault by the Council in how it dealt with Miss B’s housing situation. It failed to send important decision letters or delayed in doing so, which meant that Miss B missed out on her right to ask the Council to review its decisions. It cannot show that it agreed a personal housing plan with her and it did not respond properly to her requests that it put these things right. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss B and share this decision with its staff.

The complaint

1. Miss B says the Council:
• did not send her a decision letter regarding her application made in 2020;
• would not let her make a fresh assessment in 2021 via its website. At an assessment appointment regarding this, the Council told her to make a new application under a different name and date of birth;
• did not treat her properly. It did not take into account that she has anxiety and sometimes may need things explaining more than once, told her after 15 minutes that she was wasting time and the officer had other assessments to do, did not give her clear information about how to make a complaint about the officer who twice hung up on her during telephone conversations;
• did not prepare the Personal Housing Plan with her, and took too long to send this to her;
• did not assist her to find somewhere to live and did not fund the whole rent in advance and deposit she needed to secure her private rented property; and
• did not resolve her bidding number which meant she could not bid on properties.
2. Miss B says her dealings with the Council have left her upset and frustrated.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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

5. I considered the information provided by Miss B and discussed the issues with her. I considered the information provided by the Council including its file documents. I also considered the law and guidance set out below. Both parties had the opportunity to comment on a draft of this statement. I have taken the comments of both parties into account before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The law

6. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with 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)
7. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing. This is known as the relief duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
8. 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, from 3 April 2018 Homelessness Code of Guidance 18.32 and 18.33)

What happened

9. In 2020, Miss B was living with her mother and other family members. It was overcrowded and her mother asked her to leave. She contacted the Council who explained that Miss B was a single person and her circumstances did not mean she had priority need. It told her that it would not have a duty to rehouse her but would help her find accommodation. It advised her on benefits. The Council says that Miss B said she did not want to continue with the application. The Council did not take a homeless application from Miss B and closed her case.
10. Miss B moved to a privately rented room with shared facilities. Her landlord also lived in the house. Miss B says there was damp and mould in the house and this worsened her asthma. She took this up with the landlord but nothing improved. After several requests, the landlord told Miss B she must leave and gave her a date to move out by 3 June 2021. Miss B tried to register a housing application online but the system told her she could not.
11. She contacted the Council on 4 May and after chasing the Council for a response she had her first homelessness assessment interview by telephone on 21 May. Miss B says the officer dealing with her was rude, advised her that as she had an application on the system she would need to register under a contact details, dealt with another case while on the phone to her, hung up on her and said she was wasting time.
12. Miss B complained to the Council about how the officer dealt with her. The Council arranged a new assessment with a different officer for 27 May. The officer took details of Miss B’s situation. By this time, she was not living at the house and was staying with friends and her mother. She reported she had severe asthma. The officer told Miss B the Council would decide if she had a priority need or not. It said if she did not have a priority need, it would have no duty to house her but would help her find accommodation.
13. The Council considered Miss B’s medical information but decided she did not have a priority need. It emailed her on 2 June to let her know and that she should look for accommodation but it might be able to help with a deposit and rent in advance. The Council’s email did not explain why the Council had decided she had no priority need, and did not set out her right to ask that this be reviewed.
14. On 9 June, Miss B told the Council she had found a studio property to rent. She gave the Council details of the property and landlord on 11 June and asked it to consider paying rent in advance . The landlord contacted the Council asking if it would make a payment. On 18 June, the Council offered the landlord a payment of £500, which the landlord accepted. At the same time, the Council sent Miss B her personal housing plan. Miss B’s tenancy stated on 20 June.
15. The Council has no policy on how much rent in advance or deposit it will pay. The file shows it based the £500 payment on the amount the local housing allowance. This is the maximum amount Miss B would receive if she were to claim benefits for housing costs. It was not the whole amount she needed but was based on the rate for sharing facilities as Miss B at that time was under 25 years old. The Council processed the payment on 5 July.
16. Between the Council telling Miss B that she had no priority need on 2 June, and the landlord accepting the Council’s offer on 18 June, Miss B says she contacted the Council asking for a letter with its decisions and for a copy of her personal housing plan. She says the officers did not respond to her and sometimes put the phone down on her.
17. Miss B complained to the Council. The Council:
• apologised for the first officer’s unprofessional behaviour;
• said that it had done an initial assessment of her application in 2020 and it was unlikely that the Council would have had a duty to house her;
• accepted that it should have sent personal housing plan earlier. It said that this should have been a collaborative document with agreed actions. It also should have written to her to inform her that it had accepted the relief duty.
• The Council would take up the issues of the decision letters and the personal housing plan being absent or delayed with the team managers, and her complaints about the behaviour with the officer.
18. Miss B complained to the Ombudsman. She feels the Council’s response does not reflect how badly it treated her, and that it should do more to put matters right.

Was there fault by the Council causing an injustice to Miss B?

19. There was no fault in 2020 when the Council closed Miss B’s case. It says she did not want to proceed with this.
20. The Council has accepted that its officer was unprofessional, that it did not send Miss B a decision letter about the relief duty and that it took too long to send her the personal housing plan. The Council’s remedy of an apology for its failings and that it would raise this issue with the officer and with managers is an appropriate remedy.
21. However the Council has failed to identify further failings, and is likely to have missed earlier opportunities to put things right when Miss B was contacting individual officers. Miss B should not have had to make repeated contacts to resolve these issues.
22. Not only did the Council take too long to send Miss B the personal housing plan, but it cannot evidence that it agreed this with her collaboratively. This was fault by the Council.
23. The Council told Miss B on 2 June that it had decided she had no priority need for housing. This meant the Council had no duty to find her emergency or settled accommodation. There was fault by the Council because it took too long to send Miss B the formal letter of its decision.
24. The Council’s failings here meant that Miss B was not told in good time of her right to ask the Council to review its decision that she did not have priority, or the contents of the plan. This caused Miss B frustration and some confusion as to what was happening with her homelessness application. Miss B says she had new evidence of her mental health for the Council to consider as part of her review. It is difficult to say what would have happened had she submitted this to the Council. However, on balance, it is unlikely that any review would have significantly altered the outcome.
25. Miss B says her dealings with the Council caused her to become suicidal, she has needed more treatment for her mental health and had to leave her job. I understand that this is Miss B’s experience, but not all of the impact on her was caused by the Council’s shortcomings. Although Miss B does not think an apology is sufficient, the Council’s shortcomings did not cause her to become homeless or to be in unsuitable accommodation.
26. Although in this case, the impact of the Council’s failings were limited, there is potential for much more serious consequences if these failings are repeated in other cases.
27. There was no fault when the Council did not find a property for Miss B. Under the relief duty the Council has to take reasonable steps to help her to secure a property. There was only one week between its decision that it would not have a duty to house and Miss B finding a property. The Council helped her to secure this by making a payment to the rent in advance.
28. The Council does not have to pay the whole of the rent in advance. It has explained that it based its offer on the local housing allowance, and it was clear with the landlord about this.
29. I have looked at the correspondence between Miss B, the Council and the landlord when it agreed the rent in advance. I can see that the landlord contacted the Council after Miss B had given it details of the new property. But the Council confirmed the amount it would agree the next day and its communications with the landlord were clear. There was no fault in how the Council decided how much rent in advance to pay or how it arranged this.
30. Miss B tells me that her bidding number does not work on the Council’s automated system. I have asked the Council to look into this and reply to Miss B.

Back to top

Agreed action

31. The Council will show the Ombudsman that within one month of this decision it has:
• apologised to Miss B for the upset and frustration its further failings caused her; and
• shared this decision with relevant staff.

Back to top

Final decision

32. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman