Summary: Mr X complained the Council have failed to keep him updated regarding his homelessness application and continue to delay any action. He said this has caused him significant distress. We find fault by the Council. To address the injustice caused by fault, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment and remind staff of its duties.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council have failed to keep him updated regarding his homelessness application and continue to delay any action. He said this has caused him significant distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened?

Homelessness

6. 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.
7. When a person applies to a council for accommodation and it has reason to believe they may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, a number of duties arise, including:

• to make enquiries;
• to secure suitable accommodation for certain applicants pending the outcome of the enquiries;
• to notify the applicant of the decision in writing and the right to request a review of the decision.

8. There are no statutory time limits for completing enquiries, however the Homelessness Code of Guidance, issued by the Government in 2006, recommends councils aim to complete their enquiries within 33 working days.
9. 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)]

Assessments and personal housing plans

10. 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)
11. Councils should provide assessment services that are flexible to the needs of the applicants. Whilst advise and information services could be provided via an online process, councils could not rely solely on such means to complete assessments into individual circumstances and needs for people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.13)
12. In most circumstances assessments will require at least one face to face interview. However, where that is not possible or does not meet the applicants needs, assessments could be completed on the telephone or internet or with the assistance of a partner agency. For example, an applicant who is in prison, hospital or in other circumstances where they cannot attend an interview, could have an assessment completed through a video link or with the help of a partner agency able to complete an assessment form, provide information and assist with communication where needed. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.14)

Prevention duty

13. 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. In deciding what steps they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

Equality Act

14. The Equality Act 2010 says an individual or organisation that provides a service to the public, such as councils, must not treat someone worse just because of one or more “protected characteristics”. Protected characteristics include people with disabilities.
15. When the duty arises, the public body is under a positive and proactive duty to look at removing or preventing obstacles to a disabled person accessing its services. If the adjustments are reasonable it must make them.
16. The Act is supported by a Code of Practice, which is statutory guidance. This means public bodies must have regard to it.
17. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010.
18. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. But we can make decisions about whether or not an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them.

What did happen?

19. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
20. The Council re-opened Mr X’s homelessness application on 14 July 2022, following Mr X’s previous complaint to us (22001812).
21. The Council tried to call Mr X the following month. But Mr X said he was not well and did not wish to speak on the phone. He asked the Council to email him instead.
22. The Council told Mr X it had looked into his request of completing the assessment via email. But it said it would need to speak to him on the phone to complete this. Mr X asked the Council what further information it required and said due to his mental health, he could not speak on the phone.
23. The Council asked Mr X if it could refer him to the crisis team in order for them to support him with the application. But Mr X said the crisis team could not help and stated the Council had a duty to make reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities.
24. In August and September 2022, Mr X repeatedly asked the Council for an update on its enquiries with housing and the police.
25. Mr X complained to the Council on 17 October 2022 about the lack of response to his emails and said the officer dealing with his case had deactivated their email address.
26. The Council responded under its stage one complaints process. It said the housing officer had changed roles without advising Mr X, there had been a delay in a response being provided to him and a delay in the case being allocated to a different officer. But it said it had attempted to call him multiple times in August to carry out an assessment and said it had no evidence that Mr X had chased it for a response. It provided Mr X with a chronology of actions it had taken.
27. Mr X requested his complaint be escalated. He said the Council’s response provided false information and provided it with a list of dates when he had no response to emails he had sent. He also stated he had no response to his email request for reasonable adjustments.
28. A new housing officer was allocated to Mr X’s case in October 2022.
29. The Council responded to Mr X under its stage two complaints process the following month. It did not uphold his complaint and said it had been investigated thoroughly.
30. A meeting was held in November 2022 at Mr X’s legal representative’s office to facilitate the homelessness assessment.
31. The Council accepted the prevention duty in December 2022. It advised Mr X the following month that his personal housing plan (PHP) was available to view on the online portal.
32. The Council said as Mr X was unable to access the PHP through the online portal, it sent it him via a different format.

Analysis

33. The Council has acknowledged that there has been delays dealing with Mr X’s application and has since recognised that neither complaint responses provided an apology to Mr X. Whilst we recognise the Council has now agreed to apologise to Mr X, the delays in dealing with his request caused him significant distress at a time he was seeking help.
34. In the Council’s stage one response to Mr X, it said it had no evidence to suggest Mr X had chased it for a response. But the Council has provided us with evidence that Mr X asked the Council three times in August and September 2022 for an update on the Council’s enquiries with housing and the police. I have seen no evidence to suggest the Council responded to the first two emails. This is fault. This meant Mr X spent unnecessary time and trouble contacting the Council.
35. Mr X told the Council in August 2022 about the reasonable adjustments he required due to his mental health. This included communication in writing. The Council advised Mr X as per the homelessness code of guidance, it was not able to use an online process to complete the full assessment and asked if it could refer him to the crisis team to help with his application which Mr X declined. In order to carry out the assessment, the Council completed a face-to-face meeting with Mr X at his legal representative’s office in November 2022. The Equality Act 2010 says that councils should provide reasonable adjustments where suitable. It was therefore for the Council to explain to Mr X whether it could provide the requested reasonable adjustments. Whilst the Council did initially explain to Mr X it was not able to use an online process to complete the assessment, I have seen no further evidence to suggest how the Council explained to Mr X how it would meet his required reasonable adjustments. This is fault. This caused further distress to Mr X.

Back to top

Agreed action

36. To address the injustice caused by fault, within one month of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Mr X for the delays in dealing with his application and for not explaining how it would meet his reasonable adjustments.
• Pay Mr X £200 to acknowledge the distress caused by the faults identified in this statement.

37. Within two months of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:

• Remind relevant staff of the proactive duty to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act and ensure this is communicated to applicants.

38. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

39. There was fault by the Council. The actions the Council has agreed to take remedy the injustice caused. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman