Woking Borough Council (21 019 096)
Category : Housing > Homelessness
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 09 May 2022
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council forced the complainant into private rented accommodation and will not help her move to a different council area. This is because it is a late complaint, there were review rights the complainant could have used, and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
- The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains the Council forced her into private rented accommodation which she could not afford. She also says the Council will not help her move to a different council area.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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 an investigation if we decide:
- there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
- it would be reasonable for the person to ask for an organisation review or appeal.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
- 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)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and the letters offering the property. I considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.
My assessment
- The law allows councils to discharge its homelessness duty by offering properties from a private landlord.
- The Council accepted Ms X as homeless in 2019. It offered a privately rented home in June. Ms X still lives in that property. The Council explained it proposed to end its homelessness duty by offering the flat. It said it would not provide further help if Ms X rejected the offer. The Council told Ms X she had 21 days to ask for a review if she did not think the offer was suitable. Ms X accepted the offer and did not ask for a review. The Council ended its homelessness duty to Ms X in July 2019 because she had accepted the property.
- In 2022 Ms X complained to the Council about being offered a privately rented home. She also said she wanted to move to a different council area. In response the Council explained it had helped to end her homelessness in 2019 and had no further duty to help because she is adequately housed.
- I will not investigate this complaint because it is late and because Ms X could have used her review rights. The Council offered the property in June 2019 but Ms X did not complain to us until March 2022. This is significantly longer than 12 months and I have not seen any good reason to accept such a late complaint. If Ms X did not think the flat was suitable, as she now says, she could have used her review rights. It is reasonable to expect her to have appealed because asking for a review is the appropriate way to challenge homelessness decisions. Ms X says she was unaware she could complain but the offer letter in 2019 said she could ask for a review if she did not think the property was suitable. Ms X could also have made a complaint at any time before 2022.
- I will not investigate the complaint that the Council will not help Ms X move to a different council area. This is because the housing register is only open to people with a housing need and because the Council does not have accommodation outside its area. Although Ms X would like to be nearer her child’s father, this is not a housing need as defined by the policy.
Final decision
- We will not start an investigation because it is a late complaint, Ms X could have used her review rights, and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman