Summary: Mx B complained the Council delayed securing temporary accommodation and when it did, did not tell him it would charge for this. Mx B said the Council’s fault left him street homeless and in rent arrears. We found fault with the Council for failing to tell Mx B to apply for housing benefit when it provided him with accommodation. The Council will apologise to Mx B and review its procedure for arranging interim and temporary accommodation to ensure it tells individuals to apply for housing benefit and keeps a record of this.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall refer to as Mx B, complained the Council delayed securing temporary accommodation and when it did, did not tell him it would charge him for this. Mx B said the Council’s fault left them street homeless and in rent arrears.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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:
• Mx B’s complaint and the information he provided;
• documents supplied by the Council;
• relevant legislation and guidelines; and
• the Council’s policies and procedures.
6. Mx B and the Council had the opportunity to comment on a draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

7. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
8. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the Council:
• 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)]
9. 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. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5) 
10. Assessment duty: 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)
11. Relief duty: 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 (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
12. 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)
13. Examples of applicants in priority need are:
• people with dependent children;
• pregnant women;
• people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems, disability or old age.
14. The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 stipulates that people who are homeless because of domestic abuse have automatic priority need. This came into force in October 2021.
15. 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)
16. If a council is satisfied someone is eligible, homeless, in priority need and unintentionally homeless it will owe them the main homelessness duty. Generally, the Council carries out the duty by arranging temporary accommodation until it makes a suitable offer of social housing or private rented accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
17. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions:
• Eligibility for assistance.
• What duty (if any) is owed to them if they are found to be homeless or threatened with homelessness.
18. Councils must complete reviews of these decisions within eight weeks of the date of the review request.

What happened

19. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
20. Mx B lived in a housing association property in another council area. He was a secure housing tenant. In May 2021, Mx B was assaulted by a family member.
21. In June 2021, Mx B fled to this Council area. Mx B told his housing association what had happened. It gave him safety advice and said it would get his locks changed. It advised it would assess his case once it had received information from the police about the incident. The housing association said it could not provide him with temporary accommodation in the area he had fled to and told him to contact the Council.
22. His housing association sent the Council a letter of support. It said it considered Mx B at high risk of threats of violence and in need of temporary accommodation. It said it was investigating the assault and whether it could offer Mx B an emergency management move.
23. Mx B made a homelessness application to the Council. He explained his situation and said he had been staying with the mother of his daughter who lived in the Council area and had spent a couple of nights street homeless. He gave the date he moved out of his housing association property as the end of August 2021.
24. The Council completed an assessment and personalised housing plan for Mx B. It told Mx B it needed to know the result of the investigation by his housing association and whether it would offer him an emergency management move. It advised he was not eligible for temporary accommodation under the Housing Act. It said it would try and find him somewhere to stay outside of this duty. Mx B said he wanted to stay in Leicester. The Council explained he could not join the housing register because he was not a qualifying person. It gave him advice about finding private sector accommodation and told him the Council could offer him financial support to secure a tenancy. The Council sent Mx B a copy of his personalised housing plan.
25. The Council wrote to Mx B and confirmed it decided he:
• was threatened with homelessness;
• was eligible;
• did not have priority need for housing assistance.
26. It explained it considered the domestic abuse incident, his mental health and his time in custody when it decided he was not in priority need. It said it would continue to support him under the relief duty until this ended. It advised:
• it had no obligation to provide him with accommodation on a temporary or permanent basis whilst help was provided, and;
• when the duty owed under the relief duty came to an end, it would have no obligation to provide him with a final offer of accommodation if it could not relieve his homelessness.
27. The Council told Mx B he could ask for a review of its decision. Mx B asked for a review in June 2021. His solicitor provided information for the review in July 2021.
28. Mx B told the Council he could not stay with the mother of his daughter because she was emotionally abusive, and he was rough sleeping. Mx B provided the Council with information about his medical conditions. He also told the Council he had worked and lived in Leicester intermittently since 2019 and his child lived there. The Council told Mx B it had considered the information he provided and decided did not owe him a duty to provide temporary accommodation. It also advised he did not meet the local connection criteria to join the housing register. The Council encouraged Mx B to speak to his housing association.
29. In August 2021, the police confirmed Mx B was a victim of domestic abuse in the area where he lived before, and he would be at risk if he returned to his housing association property. Because of the Council’s new duties under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, the Council offered Mx B interim accommodation which he accepted.
30. The Council completed its review of its homelessness decision in September 2021. The Council decided Mx B was eligible for assistance, homeless, in priority need and not intentionally homeless. It overturned the decision it made in June 2021. It explained its decision was based on the fact Mx B was a victim of domestic abuse and had automatic priority need under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021.
31. The housing association contacted the Council. It said Mx B had settled in Leicester, but it did not have any properties in the city. It asked the Council if it could help Mx B with rehousing.
32. In December 2021, the Council accepted the main housing duty for Mx B. In January 2022, the Council told Mx B its relief duty had ended, and it owed him the main housing duty. It said it would make an offer of social housing or private rented accommodation. It explained, however, that it could not do this until he ended his tenancy with the housing association. It asked Mx B to tell the Council when he had done this. It advised it would continue to provide him with temporary accommodation until then. The housing association told the Council it had contacted Mx B and he did not want to end his tenancy.
33. The Council secured temporary accommodation for Mx B at the end of January 2022. Staff at the new accommodation explained to Mx B that he needed to complete a housing benefit claim for all the accommodation provided by the Council. Staff advised this claim could include both his housing association property and their temporary accommodation. Staff reported that Mx B refused to apply for housing benefit and said his solicitor was dealing with his accommodation.
34. In February 2022, the Council offered Mx B permanent accommodation.

Complaint

35. Mx B complained to the Council in January 2022. He complained it was not supporting him, officers were disrespectful, and he could not lead a normal life in interim accommodation. The Council responded to Mx B’s complaint. It told him accommodation it provided was not free and reminded him that it had asked him to apply for housing benefit to cover the cost of his accommodation.

Analysis

36. The Council’s relief duty began in June 2021. This duty should have ended in August 2021. The Council did not end its duty until December 2021, a delay of seven months. In response to enquiries, the Council explained the delay was because it was reviewing its homeless decision for Mx B. I do not consider this delay caused Mx B injustice. The Council could have ended its relief duty in August 2021 and stopped providing him with support without offering him accommodation because it had decided he was not in priority need. Instead, it continued to work with him while it reviewed its homelessness decision.
37. From the date Mx B asked for a review of the Council’s homelessness decision it had eight weeks to complete it. The Council took nine weeks from the date Mx B provided information for the review. The Council should have made its decision one week earlier. This did not cause Mx B significant injustice because the Council provided him with accommodation a week before it made its review decision.
38. The Council should have told Mx B to apply for housing benefit in August 2021 and not doing so was fault. There is no record Mx B was asked to apply for housing benefit until January 2022. Because of the Council’s fault, Mx B missed the opportunity to apply for housing benefit in August 2021. In January 2022, when the temporary accommodation told him to apply for housing benefit Mx B refused because he was claiming housing benefit for his housing association property and did not want to give up that tenancy. However, the temporary accommodation told him he could apply for housing benefit for both properties. On the balance of probabilities, if the Council had asked Mx B to claim housing benefit in August 2021, he would have refused.

Back to top

Agreed action

39. Within one month of the final decision, the Council will:
• Apologise to Mx B for the faults found in this investigation.
40. Within two months of the final decision, the Council will:
• Review its procedure for arranging interim and temporary accommodation to ensure it tells individuals to apply for housing benefit and it keeps a record of this.
41. The Council should provide the Ombudsman with evidence it has completed these actions.

Back to top

Final decision

42. I have completed my investigation and uphold Mx B’s complaint. Mx B was caused an injustice by the actions of the Council. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman