Summary: Ms X complained the Council did not act to relieve her homelessness, causing distress and leaving her and her child without secure accommodation. We found the Council at fault. We recommended it provides Ms X with an apology, considers making reasonable adjustments, offers interim accommodation, decides whether it owes the main housing duty, pays £2000 for the lack of accommodation to date and pays £500 for distress. Further, that it acts to prevent recurrence.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has not acted to relieve her homelessness or supported her to find accommodation in the private sector and its attitude has been poor. She says her mental health has suffered and she is still sofa surfing.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

2. I have investigated the complaint above.
3. I have not investigated Ms X’s complaint that the Council refused to destroy her information as she requested or that it later used this against her. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is the appropriate body to consider complaints about the handling of personal data. And because this complaint appears premature; Ms X has not yet completed the Council’s complaints process.

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. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))
6. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint,
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for an organisation review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

7. 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

8. I spoke to Ms X and I reviewed documents provided by Ms X and the Council. This included the Council’s case file for Ms X, Personal Housing Plans (“PHPs”) it sent to Ms X and duty letters it sent to Ms X.
9. I gave Ms X and the Council an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Definition of homeless

10. The Housing Act 1996 (the “Act”), amended by the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017, outlines councils’ duties to those homeless or threatened with homelessness.
11. A person is homeless if they have no accommodation available for occupation, in the United Kingdom or elsewhere, which they:
• are entitled to occupy by virtue of an interest in it or by virtue of an order of a court,
• have an express or implied licence to occupy, or
• occupy as a residence by virtue of any enactment or rule of law giving them the right to remain in occupation or restricting the right of another person to recover possession.
12. A person shall not be treated as having accommodation unless it is accommodation which it would be reasonable for them to continue to occupy.
13. Government guidance says some applicants may have been asked to leave their current accommodation by family or friends with whom they have been living. In such cases, the housing authority will need to consider carefully whether the applicant’s licence to occupy the accommodation has in fact been revoked, rendering the applicant homeless. 
14. Shelter’s website says a council should accept that you are homeless if you have to stay with different friends or family for short periods of time. You can be homeless even if you have a roof over your head every night.

The assessment duty

15. Under section 184 of the Act, if a housing authority has reason to believe that a person applying for accommodation, or assistance in obtaining accommodation, may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must make inquiries to satisfy itself whether the applicant is eligible for assistance and if so, what duties, if any, it owes to that person.
16. If the council is satisfied someone is eligible for assistance and either homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must assess their situation. The council must then try to agree a personalised housing plan (“PHP”) with the applicant, setting out what both parties will do to try to resolve the housing problem.
17. After assessing a person’s circumstances, a council must give them a written record of the assessment and PHP. The council should also say whether it believes it owes the prevention or relief duty.
18. The council must review and update the assessment and the PHP as circumstances change.

The prevention duty

19. Where a person is at threat of homelessness a council must act to secure the person’s accommodation so they do not become homeless. This is called the prevention duty. This duty ends after 56 days unless there is a change in circumstance.
20. The council must write to the person where it decides to end the duty, giving the reasons why it has ended and notifying the applicant of their right to request a review of that decision.
21. We have seen councils in some investigations telling people they were owed the wrong duty. Most commonly, councils told people they were owed the prevention duty instead of the relief duty, when they were already homeless. This can happen when a council fails to appreciate someone is already homeless, for example when the person has an address but it is not reasonable to remain there.

The relief duty

22. Where the person is actually homeless, the relief duty may apply. This requires the council to take reasonable steps to help the applicant secure accommodation that will be available for at least six months.
23. If a council has “reason to believe” a person may be:
• homeless;
• eligible; and
• in priority need
24. then it must provide interim accommodation for them while considering if the main housing duty applied.
25. The section 188 duty to arrange interim accommodation during the relief stage is triggered as soon as the authority has reason to believe that an applicant may be eligible, homeless and in priority need. This is a low threshold. It is an absolute duty and the authority cannot postpone it due to a lack of available resources. We would expect any offer of interim accommodation to be in writing and include the name and address of the accommodation offered.
26. The relief duty ends after 56 days.  The council must then complete inquiries promptly to decide what further duty is owed (the main housing duty).
27. The council must write to the person if it decides to end the duty, giving the reasons why it has ended and notifying the applicant of their right to request a review of that decision.

The main housing duty

28. If homelessness is not successfully prevented or relieved, a council will owe the main housing duty to applicants who are eligible, have a priority need for accommodation and are not homeless intentionally.
29. The main housing duty is a duty to provide suitable temporary accommodation until such time as the duty is ended, either by an offer of settled accommodation or for another specified reason.
30. I note the Council’s website does not make this clear, rather it refers users to its housing strategy. However, the Council has to provide accommodation.

Domestic abuse

Homeless code of guidance for councils

31. Section 177 of the Act makes clear it is not reasonable for a person to continue to occupy accommodation if it is probable that this will lead to violence or domestic abuse against an individual, or against a person who would normally or reasonably be expected to live with them.
32. Housing authorities should seek to obtain an account of the applicant’s experience to assess whether the behaviour they have experienced is abusive or whether they would be at risk of domestic abuse if they continued to occupy their accommodation. 
33. An assessment of the likelihood of a threat of violence or abuse being carried out should not be based on whether there has been actual violence or abuse in the past. 

Support to secure private accommodation

34. The Council’s website explains how it can help secure private rented accommodation.
35. The Private Rented Sector Access Team can:
• give you advice and assistance about private rented options
• talk to any landlords or agents on your behalf
• carry out affordability checks to make sure you are able to meet the rental cost of a new home
• if eligible, offer an interest free grant or loan to help cover the cost of securing a tenancy (rent in advance or deposit)
• refer you for help with, money management, debt, or other barriers that may be stopping you from getting your own tenancy
• help you to claim any benefits in respect of your rental costs (Housing Benefit or Universal Credit Housing Element).

Equality Act 2010

36. The Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful for public bodies to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010. They must also have regard to the general duties aimed at eliminating discrimination under the Public Sector Equality Duty. Disability is a protected characteristic.

Reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities

37. The reasonable adjustment duty is set out in the Equality Act 2010 and applies to any body which carries out a public function. It aims to make sure that a disabled person can use a service as close as it is reasonably possible to get to the standard usually offered to non-disabled people.
38. Service providers are under a positive and proactive duty to take steps to remove or prevent obstacles to accessing their service. If the adjustments are reasonable, they must make them.
39. The duty is ‘anticipatory’. This means service providers cannot wait until a disabled person wants to use their services, but must think in advance about what disabled people with a range of impairments might reasonably need.
40. Decisions about homelessness involve legal duties and can have significant consequences. As in this case, decision letters often contain complex language and references to legislation and case law. There is a 21 day time-limit to ask for a review. It is therefore important that applicants can access and understand the information with any reasonable adjustments they might need.

What happened

41. On 26 April Ms X contacted the Council to say she had been sofa surfing between relative’s properties since 15 April when she was evicted from a private tenancy. Ms X said she could only stay with family a few days.
42. On 27 April Ms X said she could only stay with her sister until 29 April. The Council said it could support with emergency accommodation such as a B&B which may be out of area. It said its temporary accommodation team would provide information and cost.
43. The Council completed a housing assessment form for Ms X on 27 April. This recorded Ms X was threatened with homelessness and it owed the prevention duty. Ms X was staying with family and friends but they are no longer willing to accommodate due to overcrowding. Ms X has priority need.
44. The Council completed a PHP. This included for the Council to contact Ms X’s family to confirm her circumstances by 29 April and to carry out a financial assessment to determine what she could afford. Ms X had to provide paperwork and look for properties by 13 May. If not, it may have to close her homeless application due to non-engagement.
45. The PHP includes information about any physical or mental health conditions. It does not record whether Ms X may otherwise need any adjustments to access the Council’s services.
46. On 29 April Ms X told the Council she had nowhere to stay that night. The Council called her parents who confirmed she could stay over the weekend. The Council relayed this to Ms X who accepted this was the case, but thought she would be housed quicker if she said she was street homeless. Ms X said there was no bedroom for her and her child at her parents. Ms X said it was severely overcrowded and referred to historic abuse. The Council’s notes show it considered Ms X was at no risk of domestic abuse at her current address.
47. On the same date the Council sent Ms X information on private renting including websites to search for a property, the financial support available and when to contact the private rented team for support including help with a deposit. I note this was a lengthy email with a lot of information. And it did not provide a phone number for the private rented team. It also sent information asking Ms X to register on various websites for social housing.
48. On the same date the Council emailed Ms X a copy of the PHP and a letter accepting the prevention duty. This explained it owed a duty to take reasonable steps to help her keep her current accommodation, or to help her find something else that is suitable before she reached the point where she might become homeless. It offered the right to review.
49. On 13 May Ms X contacted the Council for help securing private rented property. The Council emailed the same information as before.
50. On 5 July 2022 the Council closed Ms X’s case. It sent her a letter ending the prevention duty and offered a right of review. It said the duty ended as it was unable to contact her. She had not given details of any forwarding address or said whether she still considered herself to be homeless. The Council had tried to contact her by e-mail and on the phone number provided but received no response.
51. On 1 August Ms X contacted the Council to say she was still homeless and struggling to secure housing in either the social or private sector. The Council told Ms X it previously closed the case as she was making her own arrangements.
52. The Council reopened Ms X’s case then sent her information about registering on social housing websites again.
53. On 2 August Ms X contacted the Council. She said she was still living with parents but severely overcrowded. She did not want emergency accommodation in a B&B or a refuge. She had registered on social housing sites but had not been bidding as she did not understand she needed to. The Council then explained she need to log in and bid each week.
54. On 12 October Ms X contacted the Council to say she had to leave her current address and asked for help with a deposit on private rented property. The Council told her to view the property and contact it again if she wanted to proceed. The Council noted Ms X did not ask for any help with homeless or emergency accommodation. It then closed her case on the grounds she was making her own arrangements.
55. On 17 October Ms X contacted the Council for help with a deposit. The Council asked for further financial information. Ms X provided this but later said she did not want to pursue the property and so asked the Council to delete her financial information. The Council confirmed it would withdraw her request for assistance with the deposit but needed to keep her records on file.
56. On 25 October Ms X complained:
• She told the Council she was sofa surfing and asked for advice and support. She is dyslexic and needed information given simply and directly.
• A Council officer:
1. said she could not be housed;
2. called family members asking if they could house her which she found embarrassing;
3. claimed her bank statements were fraudulent
• On 23 October another Council officer was rude when she asked for help.
• The Council had not provided a PHP.
• It ignored her requests for help.
• It gave no support to help her find a place in the private sector.
57. On 7 November the Council spoke to Ms X about her complaint. It noted:
• She said she had been asked to leave current accommodation with family.
• It explained law and policy.
• It would meet her on 9 November to take a new homelessness application and it would also ask her family if she was threatened with homelessness.
• If she was it would owe a prevention duty for 56 days during which time it would try and prevent her becoming homeless. This would mean her bidding for social housing and looking for private. At the end of 56 days if her situation was still the same it would extend this. If she became homeless it would speak to family and see if they would accept a payment to stay. If not it would find a bed and breakfast which cost upwards of £40 per week and could be out of area.
• It would ask someone from the PRS Team to contact her to discuss this option and a complete a financial assessment to assess affordability.
58. The Council provided its stage 1 response on 8 November. In summary:
• It apologised that an officer made her feel humiliated, and had discussed this with the officer.
• It had now allocated her a new worker who would take new application and refer her to the PRS team who can support her with finding properties in private rented sector.
• She can go to stage 2 or the Housing Ombudsman.
59. On 9 November Ms X told the Council she was staying between her parents and her sister. She said she was a victim of domestic abuse. She would not give details of who this involved, but said it included threats to kick her out and violence. The Council called Ms X’s who said she could stay there until she found somewhere. Her sister did not answer its call.
60. On the same date the Council completed a housing assessment form. This reported Ms X was threatened with homelessness and it owed the prevention duty. Ms X was staying with family and friends but they were no longer willing to accommodate. Ms X said she was a victim of abuse but did not give details.
61. On the same date the Council completed a PHP. This said it would update Ms X’s housing needs, give her information on private renting, and help get her previous deposit returned. Ms X needed to keep the Council up to date and search for private rented accommodation.
62. I have not seen evidence the Council sent Ms X a copy of this PHP or its decision on the duty owed.
63. On 11 November Ms X told the Council she wanted to go stage 2. She needed to be housed and was not getting support. She said she was a lone parent with dyslexia, learning difficulties, anxiety and depression.
64. On 24 November Ms X told the Council she was a victim of domestic abuse at her current property and wanted a referral to a refuge. However on the same date Ms X withdrew this request and said she would contact the police.
65. On 7 December Ms X updated the Council she was struggling to claim benefits as she had no permanent address and she had been in several properties since they last spoke. Further there were no private rental viewings before Christmas.
66. The Council provided its stage 2 response on 9 December. In summary:
• It apologised if the information it sent her was confusing.
• It took a homeless application in April and gave her advice on private renting in May. It had no other contact with Ms X until it closed her case in July.
• In August following her contact it gave more information.
• In October following her contact it started a financial assessment and wrote to her asking for more information. It accepted this communication was not best practice and had fed this back.
• It apologised she was unhappy with a call on 23 October.
• Its PRS team had spoken to Ms X about support it can offer.
• It acknowledged Ms X was sofa surfing and placed her on register band 3 threatened with homelessness.
• Ms X should continue to bid for properties and contact its PRS team if she finds any suitable private rented properties.
• It had taken a new homelessness application, accepted the prevention duty and completed a new PHP.
• If her current housing situation was unsustainable she should contact it to arrange emergency accommodation. This would ensure she was accommodated temporarily while it progressed her homeless application.
• She could go to the Housing Ombudsman.
67. Ms X then contacted the Ombudsman. When I spoke to Ms X she was unhappy the Council had not destroyed her financial documents as she requested and then used this information against her.
68. In comments on a draft decision the Council said:
• It acknowledged it should have acted earlier to relieve Ms X’s housing situation.
• On the initial contact Ms X told the call handler she suffered with Asthma. And, on completion of the first assessment on 27 April 2022, she confirmed, when asked, there were no issues with mental health and no physical disabilities.
• Ms X did not disclose any support needs or learning difficulties until 25 October. It therefore did not implement any adjustments as it was not aware of the individual need until this date.
• It accepts once it was made aware Ms X had dyslexia, it failed to discuss her support needs with her in terms of adjustments, especially regarding communication. It will now be incorporating additional questions regarding how customers would like the Council to communicate with them, taking account of any support needs. It will ensure this is embedded across the service from first contact onwards.
• It would be preferable to offer named, temporary accommodation but this is not always possible. Frequently, temporary accommodation is subject to availability at the time of booking, for example, bed and breakfast is booked according to the needs of the household and availability on the day it is required.
• It now enclosed a PHP and a decision letter accepting the prevention duty, as sent to Ms X on 17 November.
• It acknowledges the stage 1 complaint response references the wrong Ombudsman, and it will amend its letter templates.
• It accepts the recommendations of the draft decision.

Findings

69. I have not seen any evidence to suggest the Council asked Ms X if she needed any support or adjustments to access its services on first contact or at all. I therefore consider the Council did not give due regard to its duty to make reasonable adjustments. This is fault. Ms X struggled to understand lengthy and complex information the Council sent. Because of the Council’s fault, she missed the opportunity to access information and support in a way she could understand, including the bidding process and support on contacting letting agents. This is injustice.
70. I recognise Ms X did not offer the Council information on her support needs until later. However, it is the Council's duty to make adjustments and the Council must be proactive in meeting this duty. This means we expect councils to ask service users if they need any support in accessing a service at the outset.
71. Ms X had the right to a review of the Council’s decision on the prevention duty. However, I consider it was not reasonable for her to use that right given she did not know the relief duty may apply and struggled to understand information the Council provided.
72. In deciding Ms X was threatened with homelessness and not actually homeless, the Council does not appear to have taken account that sofa surfing is an indicator of homelessness; that any license to stay at her parent’s home expired on 3 May (as they said she could only stay until then) or, whether it was reasonable for Ms X to continue to occupy her parent’s home. This is fault.
73. Given the law and Government guidance I am satisfied if the Council had taken relevant information into account it would have found Ms X was homeless at the outset and offered interim accommodation pending its decision on the main housing duty. Miss X missed out on interim accommodation. This is injustice.
74. On the evidence seen it appears the Council ended the prevention duty without contacting Ms X as it said. The case file shows no change in contact details or attempts to contact. This is fault.
75. Upon Ms X’s contact of 1 August the Council should have assessed her situation and decided what, if any, duties it owed. However, it took no such action. This is fault. Ms X again missed the opportunity for support. This is injustice.
76. On 12 October Ms X said she had to leave her current accommodation. Yet there is no evidence the Council took into account that Ms X was saying she was homeless. This is fault. But for this fault, I am satisfied the Council would have found Ms X homeless and offered interim accommodation pending a decision on the main housing duty. Ms X therefore again missed the opportunity to be accommodated. And while she remained at her parents she would have suffered distress and uncertainty as the arrangement could end at any time. This is injustice.
77. For clarity, we would expect the Council to offer named accommodation when offering interim accommodation, preferably in writing. Waiting for Ms X to request accommodation or referring to vague details of emergency accommodation does not meet the duty. It may be that a council books a place in a Bed and Breakfast on the day and then calls a service user to offer this place, naming the BnB. This allows the service user to make an informed decision on whether to accept the offer.
78. I have not seen any evidence to suggest the Council took account of information Ms X provided on 24 November that she was a victim of domestic abuse at her current address. Government guidance is clear it should have considered if it was reasonable for her to continue occupying the address. That it did not do so is fault. But for this fault, I am satisfied the Council would have found Ms X homeless and offered interim accommodation pending a decision on the main housing duty. Ms X therefore again missed the opportunity to be accommodated. And I am satisfied she continued to suffer distress and uncertainty. This is injustice.
79. I have not seen any evidence to suggest the Council took account of Ms X’s update of 7 December that she was living between several properties. This is fault. Ms X again missed the opportunity for any support. This is injustice.
80. The Council’s stage 1 complaint response does not fully address the complaints raised and references the wrong Ombudsman. This is fault. I am satisfied this caused Ms X distress and uncertainty. This is injustice.
81. The Council accepts some shortfall in its communications with Ms X, with reference to a letter of 17 October and phone call of 23 October. On the information seen, I do not consider the matters complained of reach our threshold for a finding of fault. However, in any event I am satisfied the Council’s apology is a suitable remedy.
82. The Council appears to have followed its policy to offer help with a deposit subject to a financial assessment. Ms X then withdrew her request for support before completing. I find no fault.

Back to top

Agreed action

83. To remedy the injustice set out above I recommend the Council carry out the following actions.
84. Within one month of this decision:
• provide a written apology to Ms X;
• ask Ms X if she needs any adjustments in how it communicates with her and inform her if it will make any such adjustments, giving reasons for any refusal;
• offer Ms X interim accommodation pending a decision on whether it owes her the main housing duty;
• decide whether it owes the main housing duty and notify Ms X of its decision, offering a right of review;
• pay Ms X £500 for distress and uncertainty;
• pay Ms X £2000 for failing to provide suitable accommodation for ten months, from 26 April 2022 to March 2023.
85. Within three months of this decision:
• take action to ensure it checks if service users need any support or adjustments to access it services on first contact and at regular intervals thereafter;
• amend its complaint letter templates regarding homelessness complaints to refer complainants to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman;
• amend its website to make clear the Council has a duty to provide accommodation where it accepts the main housing duty;
• provide training or guidance to its housing team to ensure they understand the Council’s duties to relieve homelessness under the Housing Act 1996, with reference to this decision.
86. The Council has accepted these recommendations.
87. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

88. I find the Council at fault in its actions and decisions in responding to Ms X’s reports of homelessness. The Council has accepted my recommendations and I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman