Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response after the complainant sought advice about potential homelessness. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about the way the Council treated her after she sought help regarding potential homelessness. She says the Council was hostile, dismissive, cruel and neglectful. She fears she will be homeless by January and wants a face to face meeting with the Council to avoid homelessness.

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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Ms X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council has a duty to help people if they are threatened with homelessness within 56 days. A landlord cannot evict a tenant until they have issued a notice and obtained a court order.
5. Ms X is a joint tenant of a private landlord. She sought help from the Council after the other tenant (tenant A) decided to leave and Ms X said she would be unable to pay the rent and council tax on her own. Ms X had a telephone interview with the Council when she explained her situation.
6. After the call Ms X gathered documents and the Council contacted the agent (for the landlord). The agent said tenant A had confirmed in writing they would continue to pay the rent and council tax for the duration of the tenancy. The agent said tenant A had not served notice to end the tenancy and the agent had not served a notice on Ms X asking her to leave. The Council checked Ms X’s income and expenditure and found the property is affordable. The Council decided not to provide assistance because Ms X is not threatened with homelessness within 56 days. There was a second call during which the Council explained its decision.
7. Ms X complained about the way she was treated. She said she was dismissed, talked over and left emotionally distraught. Ms X said she was not complaining about the outcome but about the way she was treated. In response the Council explained the actions it had taken to deal with the homelessness enquiry. It acknowledged Ms X had found the calls difficult but said the officer denied behaving inappropriately. The Council said there were conflicting accounts of what happened during the calls and, as it had not been possible to listen to recordings of the calls, the Council could not support or deny either version of events.
8. I will not investigate this complaint for the following reasons. There is no suggestion of fault in the way the Council responded to Ms X’s concerns about her tenancy. It checked with the agent and established that tenant A was planning to continue to pay the rent and the agent had not served a notice asking Ms X to leave. On this basis the Council decided Ms X is not threatened with homelessness. If Ms X’s circumstances change she can contact the Council again.
9. Ms X says she was treated badly by the Council; this had a negative impact on her as a vulnerable person and on her mental health. The Council cannot comment further on these allegations as there is no call recording. In the absence of any evidence to either substantiate or deny Ms X’s allegations it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman