Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled the complainant’s homelessness and housing applications. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, and it has already provided a satisfactory remedy for any administrative errors and inconvenience caused.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Miss X, complains about how the Council handled her homelessness and housing applications. Miss X says the Council’s failure to notify her of its decision to end its relief duty meant she was not able to request a review. Miss X also disagrees with the Council’s decision to reject her application for housing. Miss X would like the Council to put her on the housing register to compensate for how it handled her applications.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• a satisfactory remedy has already been provided, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Miss X, including her comments in response to my draft decision. I also considered information provided by the Council and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Miss X says the Council did not inform her of its decision to end its relief duty and she was therefore not able to request a review of the decision. After the Council placed Miss X into accommodation, it wrote to her in October 2020 advising that it had ended its relief duty and she was given her rights to request a review. We are therefore unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.
5. Miss X complains about the Council’s decision to reject her application for housing; she also says she was not notified of the Council’s decision at the time. Miss X submitted her application in December 2020 and the Council wrote to her in January 2021 advising that in line with its allocation policy, she did not meet the eligibility criteria to be registered in any of its priority groups. Miss X requested a review, and in June 2021 the Council wrote again advising that it had upheld its decision. We are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council as it wrote to Miss X to advise her of its decision, and it considered its allocations policy to determine if Miss X was eligible.
6. Miss X complained to the Council about delays and its failure to issue a decision letter regarding her homelessness application. The Council has provided a satisfactory remedy; it acknowledged its administrative errors and awarded Miss X £350 in recognition of any inconvenience caused. This is a fair remedy in line with our recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation. It has also already provided a satisfactory remedy concerning any administrative errors and inconvenience caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman