Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mrs X’s homeless application and complaint. This is because an investigation would not lead to a different outcome. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of her homeless application. She says the Council closed her case despite not providing her with support and not properly notifying her of her right to request a review of the decision to close. She also complains about delays in the Council’s complaint handling. She says she has been left in unsuitable accommodation.

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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, 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 the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X lives in a one-bedroom property. She has 50% custody of her son. She considers her property to be overcrowded as she says her son does not want to share a room with her anymore.
6. Mrs X approached the Council for support in 2021. The Council said it did not consider Mrs X to be homeless or threatened with homelessness as she had not received any notice to leave her accommodation.
7. An investigation is not justified as we are unlikely to find fault with the Council’s decision that Mrs X was not homeless or threatened with homelessness in 2021. The evidence shows Mrs X concern is about overcrowding in her current property, not that she has been asked to leave the property.
8. By law, a home is only overcrowded if two people of different sex must sleep in the same room, and they are aged 10 or over. Although Mrs X told the Council her son does not want to share a bedroom, any room a person can sleep in counts towards the room standard. Therefore, Mrs X is not statutorily overcrowded as the living room in her property would count towards the room standard. The Council has explained this to Mrs X.
9. The Council explained that although it did not consider Mrs X to be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it used its discretion to provide support to help her find larger accommodation. In effect, the Council agreed to support Mrs X under the prevention duty.
10. The Council completed a personalised housing plan with Mrs X and told her about two available two-bedroom properties. Mrs X told the Council these were not suitable as she would not be able to get her son to his school. The Council also contacted Mrs X in August 2021 about a nomination for a two-bedroom property. Mrs X declined this nomination as she wanted a property close to her son’s school. The Council considered this property to be a suitable offer.
11. During its complaint response, the Council accepted it should have formally written to Mrs X to tell her it had ended the prevention duty following her decline of the suitable nomination. This would have given Mrs X the right to request a review of the decision. The Council has asked the housing service to now review its decision to end the prevention duty.
12. Therefore, an investigation is not justified it would not lead to a different outcome. This is because the Council has made a suitable remedy offer which puts Mrs X back in the position she would have been had the accepted fault not occurred.
13. We will not investigate complaints about a Council’s complaint handling if we are not investigating the substantive complaint matters.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because an investigation would not lead to a different outcome. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman