Summary: We found fault with the way the Council responded when Miss X approached it as homeless. There were delays throughout the process that caused Miss X distress and frustration. The Council agreed actions to remedy the injustice to Miss X.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the way the Council responded when she approached it as homeless because of domestic abuse.
2. She complained the Council:

• Delayed providing her accommodation.
• Provided her accommodation that was not suitable and placed her at risk.
• Failed to support her and her children.
• Failed to carry out the actions set out in her PHP.
• Failed to complete a risk assessment.
• Recorded and communicated inaccurate information about her immigrations status.
• Referred her back to Croydon even though that was where she was fleeing from and at risk of domestic abuse.
• Failed to take into consideration the information from other professionals and failed to contact them when requested.
• Failed to carry out its duties under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021.

3. Miss X said this caused her significant distress and placed her at risk of further abuse.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I spoke to Miss X and considered the information she provided with her complaint. I made enquiries with the Council and considered its response with relevant law and guidance.
7. Miss X 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

Law and guidance

8. The Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 applies to all homelessness applications. The Homelessness Code of Guidance (the Code) is the statutory guidance to Council’s on homelessness duties and carrying out their functions.
9. If someone is homeless, or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, they can seek help from the Council. They must be eligible for assistance.
10. Where the person is threatened with homelessness, the prevention duty may apply.
11. Where the person is actually homeless, the relief duty may apply.
12. The Council will carry out an assessment and work with the person to develop a personalised housing plan (PHP).
13. If a Council has reason to believe a person may be:

• homeless;
• eligible; and
• in priority need.

then it must provide interim accommodation for them.

14. When the relief period ends the Council must decide whether it owes the person the main housing duty.
15. The Council must put all key decisions in writing and give reasons for negative decisions. In most cases, there is a right to ask for a review of the decision.
16. Where the Council arranges accommodation this must be suitable for the person and those who can reasonably be expected to live with them.
17. The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 introduced a statutory definition for domestic abuse. It made changes to council’s housing duties:

• Changing the definition of “priority need” to include those seeking assistance with homelessness after fleeing domestic abuse;
• Introducing a “domestic abuse protection order” to secure the victims current accommodation; and
• Requiring councils to grant secure tenancies in some circumstances.

18. The Code provides guidance to councils providing homelessness services to people who have experienced, or are at risk of, domestic abuse.
19. Chapter ten of the Code provides guidance on an applicants local connection and explains the conditions and procedures for referring an applicant to another Council.
20. A council cannot refer an applicant to another council if they would be at risk of domestic abuse or other violence. The council is under a positive duty to enquire whether the applicant would be at risk and, if they would, should not assume that the applicant will take steps to deal with the threat.

What happened

21. What follows is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain all the information I reviewed during my investigation.
22. Miss X lived in another Council area (Council A) with her children. Miss X was a victim of domestic abuse by her ex-partner. She left her address with her children and Council A accepted it owed her the homeless duty in 2019. It supported Miss X into privately rented accommodation.
23. Miss X approached the Council subject of this complaint (Council B) as homeless in September 2021. She told the Council she was at risk of domestic abuse from her ex-partner if she continued to live in Council A’s area.
24. Council B accepted the relief duty in December 2021 and placed Miss X in emergency (interim) accommodation.
25. Miss X asked for a review of her PHP and made a stage one complaint in January 2022.
26. The Council responded to her complaint in February. It apologised for the way her case had been progressed and managed.
27. In February Miss X told the Council her emergency accommodation was not suitable because it was in an area where her ex-partner had connections.
28. The Council’s review of Miss X’s PHP found she had not been offered the support she was entitled to. It also found her immigration status was incorrect in the relief duty letter. The Council amended and reissued the letter. It offered Miss X a support referral but she declined as she had support in place.
29. In February Miss X asked for her complaint to be escalated to stage two. She said the stage one complaint response did not address her complaints. She said the Council failed to consider all the relevant matters and merits of her case. She also complained about her PHP steps and suitability of accommodation. She said she was not offered support and none of the follow up calls or actions she was promised had happened.
30. The Council responded in March. It upheld her complaints that:

• She felt judged by her housing advisors and asked to change to a different advisor.
• It was more than 56 days since it accepted the relief duty.
• She felt at risk in her emergency accommodation because her ex-partner has close connections to the area.

31. In its response the Council:

• Apologised to Miss X.
• Agreed to allocate a different advisor, who would also review her PHP.
• Agreed to offer alternative accommodation.
• Said it would prioritise its main duty decision.

32. The Council offered Miss X alternative accommodation in March, which she accepted. However, she immediately requested a suitability review because of childcare issues whilst she was at work. The Council decided the accommodation was suitable.
33. In April the Council made a section 198 referral to Council A because Miss X did not have any local connections. Miss X’s independent domestic violence advocate (IDVA) and her victim support worker both contacted the Council and raised concerns about the section 198 referral.
34. Council A rejected the referral. It told Council B 56 days had passed so it should make its decision about whether it owed Miss X the main housing duty.
35. Miss X asked the Council to review the section 198 referral, but it told her she did not have a right of review at that stage. It told Miss X it was satisfied she was not at risk of domestic abuse in Council A’s area. It said she had a local connection in Council C’s area and asked if she would like it to refer her to Council C. Miss X declined the referral to Council C. The Council said it was maintaining its referral to Council A.
36. During June and July the Council made further enquiries about the domestic abuse risk to Miss X in Council A’s area.
37. Miss X was unhappy with the Council’s responses and the progress of her application. She complained to the Ombudsman.
38. In response to our enquiries the Council said:

‘In light of the time it is taking to receive responses…we have decided to no longer pursue the referral to Council A… we will be accepting a main duty towards Miss X…’

My findings

39. I found fault with the Council for the way it responded when Miss X approached it as homeless.
40. There were delays at every stage of the process. Miss X approached the Council in September 2021 but the Council did not decide it owed her the relief duty or place her in emergency accommodation for two months. When it decided her emergency accommodation was not suitable there was further delay moving her to alternative accommodation. These delays meant Miss X continued living in accommodation where she felt unsafe. This caused her distress.
41. There were periods of drift and inaction which also delayed Miss X’s right of review because the Council failed to make timely decisions.
42. The Council was entitled to make a section 198 referral to Council A. However, it should not have allowed this process to contribute to the delays. If it did not agree with Council A’s decision, or it did not receive a response, it should have taken steps to escalate the matter rather than letting it drift.
43. The Code says:
44. Where the housing authority is satisfied that the applicant has a priority need and has become homeless unintentionally, the relief duty comes to an end after 56 days (section 189B(4)). Housing authorities should not delay completing their inquiries as to what further duties will be owed after the relief duty. Where the housing authority has the information it requires to make a decision as to whether the applicant is in priority need and became homeless unintentionally, it should be possible to notify the applicant on or around day 57. In cases where significant further investigations are required it is recommended that housing authorities aim to complete their inquiries and notify the applicant of their decision within a maximum of 15 working days after 56 days have passed.
45. The Council accepted the relief duty on 10 December 2021, and this was a delayed decision. The Council should have decided whether it owed Miss X the main duty by 25 February 2022 at the latest. It only decided it owed her the main housing duty after we became involved in the complaint. It missed an opportunity to resolve this during its own complaint handling. This caused uncertainty about what may have happened with Miss X’s housing situation if she had not experienced the delays.
46. The Council found some fault during its own complaint handling and offered a suitable remedy for some of the injustice it caused Miss X, this is summarised in paragraphs 30 and 31. However, the remedies did not go far enough. Following our investigation the Council agreed to pay Miss X a financial remedy in recognition of the distress, frustration, uncertainty, time and trouble it caused her. The financial remedy also recognises the time Miss X spent in unsuitable accommodation.

Back to top

Agreed action

47. The Council should provide Miss X with its main housing duty decision in writing without further delay.
48. Within one month of my final decision the Council agrees to:

• Pay Miss X £800 in recognition of the distress, uncertainty, time and trouble it caused her and the time she spent in unsuitable accommodation.
• Update the Ombudsman with what action it took in relation to Miss X’s longer term housing needs. If the delay in its main housing duty decision has disadvantaged Miss X the Council should take action to put her back in the position she would have been if the delays had not occurred.

49. Within two months of my final decision the Council agrees to:

• Review its section 198 (referral to another Council) guidance to ensure it is clear about its process if there are delays or disagreements with the other Council. The learning from this complaint should be used to inform the review.

50. The Council should provide the Ombudsman with evidence it has completed the agreed actions.

Back to top

Final decision

51. I found fault causing injustice. I completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman