Summary: There was fault in the Council’s handling of Ms X’s application to the housing register and her homelessness. This caused Ms X avoidable distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Ms X and act to improve its services.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained that the Council failed properly to consider her circumstances when deciding her priority on the housing register. In particular, that the Council did not take into account her and her child’s disability and the ongoing risk of domestic abuse.
2. As a result, Ms X remained in a property where she was at ongoing risk of abuse and was threatened with homelessness.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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

5. I spoke to Ms X and considered the information she provided.
6. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
7. I referred to the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
8. Ms X and the organisation 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

Housing allocations

9. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing.  All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme.  (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
10. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme. This means housing applicants can express an interest in available properties. This is called bidding.
11. The Council places applicants who qualify to join the housing register in a priority band from Band A (highest priority) to Band E (lowest priority).
12. So far as is relevant to this complaint, the Council awards:
• Band A to applicants with acute medical or welfare needs
• Band B to applicants with high medical or welfare needs
• Band C to homeless people and applicants with a medical welfare need
13. The Council’s scheme says it will complete reviews of decisions within 28 days.

Homelessness

14. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the Code) set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
15. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
16. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with 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)
17. 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. This is called the prevention duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
18. If councils are satisfied applicants are homeless and eligible for assistance, they must take reasonable steps to secure accommodation. This is called the relief duty. The relief duty lasts a maximum of 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
19. An applicant is homeless if, despite having accommodation available it is not reasonable for them to continue to occupy that accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(3))
20. It is not reasonable for a person to continue to occupy accommodation if it is probable this will lead to domestic abuse or other violence against the applicant or any other person who lives with them. (Housing Act 1996, section 177(1))

What happened

Allocations

21. Ms X lived in a private rented tenancy with two children. Both Ms X and the elder child are Disabled. Ms X experienced domestic abuse from the father of her youngest child. As a result, Ms X has mental and physical health conditions.
22. In March 2023, Ms X applied to join the Council’s housing register. In her application she said her landlord had issued a notice to end her tenancy. She also said she needed to leave the property because of domestic abuse. She said “I live in constant fear and never feel safe in my house.”
23. The next day, the Council wrote to Ms X. It said it had put her application in Band C because she was at risk of homelessness. Ms X asked the Council if this priority reflected all the family’s circumstances, including their health and the risk of domestic abuse.
24. The Council told Ms X these needs “were not evidenced” in her housing application. It sent her a medical assessment form to complete. Ms X returned this the same day with supporting documents.
25. The records show the Council set itself a “task” to review this evidence. It reached this task in early May. By this point, Ms X had moved into a new property. The Council therefore closed her housing application on the basis she was suitably housed.

Homelessness

26. The Council’s homelessness team contacted Ms X in early March. This was because her application to the housing register indicated she might be homeless or threatened with homelessness.
27. The Council’s record of this conversation says Ms X told it about the domestic abuse and it discussed emergency accommodation, but Ms X refused this. Ms X said they had been homeless before and living in temporary accommodation had impacted on her Disabled child too much.
28. The Council arranged a telephone appointment for Ms X for a few weeks later. The officer who spoke to Ms X was a man. Following the appointment, Ms X asked for her case to be reallocated to a female officer. The Council reallocated the case.
29. Following the assessment, the Council wrote to Ms X accepting the prevention duty.
30. In late April, the Council emailed Ms X to say her Personalised Housing Plan (PHP) was available to view and provided a link. It then wrote to her to say it was ending its duty. This was because Ms X had signed a tenancy for a private rented property through the Council’s letting agency.

My findings

Allocations

31. Despite the information Ms X provided in her housing application about domestic abuse and health, the Council did not ask Ms X to provide any additional information so it could assess her priority. This was fault.
32. When the Council asked Ms X for more information, she provided it right away. However, it took the Council two months to get to it. This delay was fault. By then, Ms X had moved.
33. I cannot say whether the Council would have awarded Ms X a higher priority had it assessed her circumstances properly. However, Ms X must live with this uncertainty, which is an injustice.

Homelessness

34. The Council arranged a telephone assessment for Ms X. She told the Council about domestic abuse in her initial contact with the Council. The Code of Guidance says such applicants should be given the option to be interviewed by an officer of the same sex. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 21.32) There is no evidence the Council considered this or asked Ms X about it. Instead, it arranged a telephone assessment with a male officer. This was fault. Ms X contacted the Council immediately afterwards to ask to be reallocated to a female officer. The Council’s failure to consider this before the appointment caused Ms X avoidable distress at an already difficult time. This is an injustice to Ms X.
35. When it first considered Ms X’s case, the Council offered her interim accommodation. This means it had reason to believe she might be homeless. However, it then accepted a prevention duty. There is no evidence the Council considered domestic abuse or Ms X and her child’s health before deciding it was reasonable for Ms X to continue to occupy the property until the notice ended. This was fault.
36. On balance, had it done so I find it would have accepted the relief duty. Given Ms X had refused interim accommodation and she moved into a private tenancy before the duty ended, there is no injustice to Ms X from this fault.
37. The Council wrote to Ms X accepting the prevention duty in March. However, there is no evidence it sent Ms X her PHP until late April, right before it closed her case. This was fault. The Council should have sent Ms X the PHP along with the letter accepting the duty.
38. PHPs set out the actions for both the applicant and the Council to take to address homelessness. The PHP the Council eventually sent Ms X had no actions for the Council and only basic steps for Ms X to provide documents. This was fault. The PHP should have provided useful information and advice to Ms X to help her understand her housing options and secure accommodation. Ms X missed out on this, which is an injustice.

Back to top

Agreed action

39. To remedy the injustice to Ms X from the faults I have identified, the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Ms X in writing
• Pay Ms X £350 in recognition of her avoidable distress and uncertainty.
40. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
41. The Council should also take the following action to improve its services:
• Remind relevant staff to ask applicants to the housing register for supporting evidence if this is necessary to assess their priority properly.
• Ensure all homeless applicants who tell the Council about experiences of domestic abuse are given the option to meet with an officer of the same sex.
• Remind relevant staff that a valid notice seeking possession of a private tenancy should not automatically lead the Council to accept a prevention duty where other circumstances, including domestic abuse, indicate the applicant is homeless and owed the relief duty.
• Remind relevant staff, with training or guidance as needed, that Personalised Housing Plans should:
1. be provided to applicants owed a duty as soon as possible after assessment;
2. be kept under review; and
3. contain meaningful steps for both the Council and the applicant to take.
42. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken within eight weeks of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

43. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman