Summary: Mr B complains the Council has not dealt with his housing needs and homelessness properly. The Council is at fault because it ended its homelessness duty to Mr B by offering him an unavailable property. The Council has since accepted the full housing duty to Mr B and backdated his application. The Council should also pay Mr B and his partner £250 each.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms X, complains the
2. Council has not dealt properly with his housing and homelessness properly because it:
• lied to him about not having any housing stock;
• failed to communicate with him about his homelessness;
• delayed dealing with his homelessness situation;
• Made him an unsuitable offer of housing;
• Closed his housing application.
3. Mr B says the Council delayed accepting its prevention duty causing him distress and leaving him in temporary accommodation following an unsuitable housing offer.

Back to top

What I have investigated

4. I have investigated that part of Mr B’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his homelessness. The final section of this statement contains my reasons for not investigating the rest of the complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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)
6. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide:
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.
7. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
8. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I spoke to Mr B about his complaint and considered documents he provided. I considered supporting documents provided by the Council.
10. Mr B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

11. 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.
12. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the Council on or after 3 April 2018:
• 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)]
13. 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)
14. 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. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular council department. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)
15. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help them to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. This is known as the prevention duty. In deciding what steps they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
16. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This is known as the relief duty. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
17. 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)
18. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
19. 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)
20. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions:
• giving notice to bring the prevention duty to an end
• giving notice to bring the relief duty to an end
• giving notice in cases of deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate
• the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation offered under section 200(3) and section 193). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.
21. The review must be carried out by someone who was not involved in the original decision and who is more senior to the original decision maker. The reviewing officer needs to consider any information relevant to the period before the decision was made (even if only obtained afterwards) as well as any new relevant information the Council has obtained since the decision. (The Homelessness (Review Procedure etc.) Regulations 2018, Homelessness Code of Guidance Chapter 19)

What happened?

22. This is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain everything I reviewed during my investigation.
23. Mr B approached the Council in December 2021 saying he was being made homeless.
24. The Council accepted a housing application from Mr B and added his partner to the application because she had received a s21 eviction notice from her accommodation.
25. The Council completed a PHP for Mr B in April 2022 and began assisting him to find properties.
26. The Council accepted the homelessness prevention duty towards Mr B and his partner.
27. In May 2022, the Council ended its homelessness prevention duty and accepted the relief duty. The Council informed Mr B that it was discharging its duty by making an offer in the private rented sector.
28. Mr B disagreed with the suitability of the accommodation offered.
29. The Council accepted it would review its decision.
30. The Council provided temporary accommodation for Mr B and his partner and continued to accept a duty to secure accommodation.
31. The Council told Mr B that the offer of accommodation it made to discharge the relief duty was an error.
32. A new housing application was accepted by the Council and it accepted the main housing duty.

Analysis

33. I have seen numerous emails backwards and forwards between Mr B and the Council regarding his housing situation. The Council provided him with his personal housing plan and sent letters about the duties it owed to him. There is no evidence it failed to communicate with him about his homelessness. This is not fault by the Council.
34. I have reviewed the timescales concerning the actions the Council took about Mr B’s homelessness situation. Although Mr B may have wished for things to happen quicker, there is no evidence that there was any excessive delay to dealing with his homelessness situation. The Council communicated clearly about the duties it owed him and why, including making clear the rights of review, at appropriate times. This is not fault by the Council.
35. After the Council made an offer of housing in May, Mr B challenged its suitability and the Council agreed to review this decision. This is the correct process and is not fault by the Council.
36. However, the Council then later told Mr B that it would not complete the review because the property was not available and should not have been offered to him. This is fault by the Council.
37. The Council has opened a new application and backdated it when it accepted the main housing duty. Mr B has therefore not suffered any loss of priority. Mr B and his partner suffered distress and a loss of certainty as a result, because they were placed in temporary accommodation, and it is not certain whether they would have been offered a suitable available property in the meantime if the Council had not made the mistake it did.

Back to top

Agreed action

38. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of this decision:
• Apologise to Mr B and his partner; and
• Pay Mr B and his partner £250 each for their avoidable distress.

Back to top

Final decision

39. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Mr B and his partner. I have now completed my investigation.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

40. I have not investigated that part of Mr B’s complaint about the not having any housing stock, because there is insufficient indication of fault or injustice to justify investigating this.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman