Summary: Ms X complained about the way the Council handled her homelessness application when she fled domestic abuse. The Council was at fault for a delay in arranging interim accommodation, inappropriate advice about the consequences of refusing an offer, a failure to confirm in writing why the property offered was suitable and the consequences of refusing, and failings in the complaints handling process. The Council will apologise, pay Ms X £700 for the distress caused and give guidance to relevant staff.

The complaint

1. Ms X, supported by Mr Y, complained about the way the Council handled her homelessness application when she fled domestic abuse. In particular, that the Council:
1. delayed accepting a homelessness application and offering emergency accommodation;
2. did not provide sufficient information for her to make an informed choice about accepting accommodation offered to her;
3. told her it would not assist her any further if she refused the accommodation offered and that her children might be removed from her care;
4. did not protect her property by assisting her with two moves between properties;
5. delayed in addressing a bed bug issue in her accommodation;
6. failed to have due regard to its obligation to proactively consider making reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010;
7. delayed responding to her subject access request; and
8. delayed responding to her complaint.
2. As a result of these failings, Ms X said she and her son suffered significant distress. Ms X said she suffered two further assaults by her former partner whilst she was waiting for the Council to provide emergency accommodation. In addition, she had to borrow money from a family member to move between accommodation, which negatively affected her relationship with them.

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. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
6. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
7. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
8. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.
9. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information and subject access requests. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.
10. 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

What I have and have not investigated

11. Ms X complained in April 2023 about events from December 2021. We would not usually investigate events more than 12 months before a complaint to us unless there are good reasons to do so.
12. In this case, the representative, Mr Y, explained the Council delayed responding to a subject access request and he could not properly frame the complaint until he received the response. I note the Council delayed in responding to the complaint at both stage 1 and 2, but there was no delay in Mr Y complaining to us after receiving the Council’s final response. In the circumstances, I am satisfied there were good reasons for the delay in complaining to us and I decided to investigate the period from December 2021.
13. I have not investigated complaint c). Ms X had the right to ask for a review of the Council’s decision to end its housing duty on the basis it had made an offer of suitable accommodation that was available for at least six months, following which she could have appealed to the County Court on a point of law. Mr Y said the Council did not provide sufficient information for Miss X to make an informed choice about whether to accept the accommodation nor to frame a request for a review. Although the letter ending the relief duty does not set out in detail the Council’s reasons for deciding the property was suitable, I am not persuaded this prevented Mr Y asking for a review of its decision. He simply needed to explain to the Council why he did not consider the property offered was suitable.
14. I have not investigated complaint e). This is because it does not relate to accommodation provided under the Council’s homelessness duties. Complaints about the management of social housing by a registered social housing provider are for the Housing Ombudsman Service to consider.
15. I have not investigated the complaint at paragraph 1 g) above. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider complaints about subject access requests.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

16. I considered:
• the information Mr Y provided on behalf of Ms X;
• the information the Council provided in response to my enquiries;
• relevant law and guidance, as set out below; and
• our guidance on remedies, available on our website.
17. Ms X and the Council 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

Relevant law and guidance

Homelessness

18. 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.
19. Where the council has reason to believe an applicant may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it should make enquiries to enable it to decide if they are eligible for assistance and, if so, what duty it owes them.
20. A person who has accommodation is to be treated as homeless where it would not be reasonable for them to continue to occupy that accommodation. (Housing Act 1996 section 175(3) and Homelessness Code of Guidance, paragraph 6.4)
21. The law and the Code says there is no simple test of reasonableness and councils should judge each application on the facts of the case. However, it says it is not reasonable for a person to continue to occupy accommodation if it is probable that this will lead to domestic abuse or other violence against the applicant or anyone who might reasonably be expected to live with them. (Housing Act 1996 section 177(1) and Homelessness Code of Guidance, paragraph 6.24)
22. If the council has “reason to believe” the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need, it must provide emergency accommodation until it has finished assessing the homelessness application if the applicant asks for it.  “Reason to believe” is a low bar. Examples of priority need are applicants with dependent children.
23. If a council is satisfied an applicant is eligible for assistance and homeless then the council will owe the ‘relief duty’. This requires the council to take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person for at least six months. The relief duty usually lasts for 56 days.
24. Councils can end the relief duty for a number of reasons, including where the applicant has refused an offer of accommodation that is suitable and will be available to them for at least six months.
25. Housing applicants can request a right of review within 21 days of being notified of certain decisions, including decisions about the ending of the relief duty and about the suitability of accommodation provided to end the duty.
26. If the council owes the applicant a relief duty, it will have a duty to protect their belongings if the applicant’s property:
• is in danger of loss or damage because the applicant is unable to protect it; and
• no other suitable arrangements have been made.
27. This duty can be satisfied by:
• moving the property to a particular location requested by the applicant; or
• arranging for personal property to be stored.

Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC)

28. A MARAC is a meeting where agencies share information on high risk domestic abuse cases. The meetings can involve representatives from the police, health, child protection, housing, probation and other relevant specialists. The MARAC provides a plan to safeguard the adult victim.

Complaints handling

29. The Council’s policy says it will acknowledge all complaints within three working days and aims to respond in writing at stage one and stage two within 20 working days. If the complaint is complex, or it needs more information, the Council will let the complainant know in advance that its investigation will take longer.

What happened

30. Mr Y contacted the Council, on Ms X’s behalf, on 9 December 2021. He said she had suffered domestic abuse at her home (property 1), which was in Council B’s area, and she was at risk of further physical and emotional abuse. He explained her case had recently been considered by MARAC, which said the case met the threshold for adult safeguarding enquiries and a social worker had been allocated. Mr Y also explained Ms X’s son has autism, and that Council B would arrange home to school transport so his education was not disrupted. He explained Ms X had supportive family in this Council’s area.
31. As well as providing a signed consent form authorising him to act on behalf of Ms X, Mr Y enclosed a statement from a mental health professional providing information about Ms X’s mental health issues and stating this should be considered a disability due to the substantial impact it had on her daily life.
32. Mr Y said that, as his approach was late in the day, he agreed the Council would consider it the next working day, which was Friday 10 December.
33. On 16 December, the mental health professional wrote to the Council to highlight the risk Ms X was under at her current property given the perpetrator of domestic abuse, Mr Z, knew where she lived, often arrived unannounced and could easily gain access to the property due to previous damage he had caused. The worker said the situation had caused “significant deterioration in [Ms X’s] mental health” and asked for the case to be prioritised as she “desperately need to feel safe”.
34. Council records show it decided it had “reason to believe” Ms X was homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need on 16 December. Also, on 16 December 2021, the Council identified interim accommodation at property 2, which was outside the Council’s area. Its records show it contacted Ms X to ask her to attend its offices to sign the necessary paperwork. I understand Ms X moved the following day. On 17 December 2022, the Council sent Ms X a decision letter stating it had accepted a relief duty.
35. In its complaint response, the Council said accommodation was offered outside its area because there was nothing else available. In response to my enquiries, the Council said it had no records to show how its temporary accommodation policy had been followed, nor did it have a letter on file offering property 2 to Miss X, explaining why it considered this was suitable for her.
36. Also in its complaint response, the Council said: “In an emergency situation, normal practice is that an assessment is carried out to ensure the Council is satisfied that a person or family are eligible for help, and are homeless, before reaching a final decision as to whether the application is accepted”. It said Ms X approached it on 11 December, so it was not unreasonable for assessments to be carried out and an application accepted on 17 December, especially as this period included a weekend.
37. Mr Y said Ms X was assaulted twice by Mr Z whilst waiting for the Council to offer interim accommodation. He said she reported both assaults to the police. When I spoke to Ms X she said she could not recall precisely what happened in that period due to the impact of the trauma she suffered, but that around that time Mr Z had broken the lock on the front door, trashed the house and told his mother he would kill Ms X. She also said he went to hit her when she had a small child in her arms and, when she flinched, he laughed at her.
38. Mr Y also said Ms X asked for assistance with the move to property 2 but was told this was not possible. He said she had to borrow £100 from a relative to hire a van, and Mr Y assisted her to move. In its complaint response, the Council said:
• section 211 of the Housing Act 1996 did not apply to homelessness;
• Council budgets were limited and it was not possible to help with moving costs, although assistance may have been available in other ways; and
• it had contacted the local church to see if it could assist but it was not able to do so as its vehicle had broken down.
39. The Council’s policy sets out when the duty to assist with storing an applicant’s belongings may arise. It does not mention moving property to a location the applicant specifies. It says: “When deciding how to perform this duty, the Council will consider the individual facts of each case”. The Council has not provided a record to confirm it contacted the local church or the advice it gave Ms X about assistance with moving.
40. Mr Y also said Ms X has significant mental health issues and her son has autism so they needed time to consider any move, any moves needed to be planned, and the number of moves to be kept to a minimum.
41. On 21 December, less than a week after the move to property 2, the Council asked Ms X to move to property 3, which was within its area. Mr Y said it told Ms X she had to move to property 3 the same day and it again refused to offer any assistance with moving. In its response to my enquiries, the Council said Ms X was told property 3 was available on 21 December “and it would appear that she moved the same day”.
42. Ms X remained at property 3 until 1 February 2022, when she moved to property 4, which was supported accommodation in the Council’s area and close to her support network. Mr Y said she was only given a few hours’ notice of the move and was told if she refused it, the Council would no longer assist her, and her children may be removed from her care. Mr Y said she was also told she would only need to stay at property 4 for 6 months. He also said he spoke to the Council the day it offered property 4 and he understood this was alternative interim accommodation.
43. When I spoke to Ms X she told me the Council officer had said she would not get any further help if she refused the offer and that she risked her children being removed because she would not be acting in their best interests.
44. In its complaint response, the Council said:
• there was no evidence it had given that advice;
• it was not correct to say it would not have assisted her if she had refused property 4 but it had explained it would have taken longer for her to move back into its area if she had refused it;
• there was no evidence to suggest she would have refused property 4 as she had said she wanted to be close to family support.
45. In response to my enquiries, the Council said it was unable to find a letter on file explaining why it considered the offer was suitable and the consequences of refusing it. It also has no record of the advice given orally.
46. On 2 February 2022, the Council wrote to Ms X to tell her the relief duty had ended because she now had suitable accommodation, which it expected to be available for at least 6 months. The letter did not explain the Council’s reasons for deciding the accommodation was suitable. It simply said it was a two bedroom flat. But it did say she could ask for a review of its decision if she disagreed with it.

Equality Act

47. Mr Y complained the Council had not considered making reasonable adjustments to the way it provided its services to Ms X and her son as it had not considered their need for adequate notice of any moves so they could be planned, and to avoid unnecessary moves.
48. In its complaint response, the Council said it was aware of Ms X’s needs, which is why it had communicated with her sister, with Ms X’s consent. It added: “There is no evidence to show [Ms X] was treated less favourably than any other person in the same circumstances”.
49. In response to my enquiries, the Council said it had no records to show how it had considered their disability needs or its Equality Act duties.

Complaints handling

50. Ms X made a formal complaint on 1 August 2022. At that stage she had not received the Council’s response to her subject access request, which was sent on 11 October 2022. The Council responded to the complaint on 21 October 2022.
51. Mr Y made a further complaint on 24 October 2022, and the Council responded on 13 March 2023.
52. The Council accepted that neither its stage 1 nor its stage 2 complaint response was sent within its published timescales. It apologised for the delay and offered to pay Ms X £200 for the time and trouble caused. Mr Y said Ms X did not accept this because she understood she could only do so if she accepted the response in full. Therefore, this sum has not been paid.

Back to top

Analysis and my findings

Interim accommodation

53. Where a council has reason to believe an applicant may be eligible for assistance, homeless, and in priority need it has an immediate duty to provide interim (often called “emergency”) accommodation.
54. In the initial referral, Mr Y said Ms X had suffered and was at risk of further domestic abuse if she remained in her current property. He said the case had been considered by MARAC and met the threshold for safeguarding enquiries. The law and the Code says it is not reasonable for a person to continue to occupy a property where it is probable this will lead to domestic abuse.
55. ‘Reason to believe’ is a low bar. Given the information available when the request for assistance was made, I find on balance that if the Council had properly considered the matter on 10 December 2022, it would have decided it had reason to believe Ms X may be eligible for assistance, homeless and in priority need. On this basis, it owed a duty to provide interim accommodation at that point. It did not arrange interim accommodation until 16 December, which was fault.
56. Mr Y said Ms X was assaulted twice whilst she was waiting for the Council to provide accommodation. Whilst I cannot hold the Council responsible for those assaults, it had left her in accommodation that was unsuitable because it left her at the avoidable risk of further domestic abuse. This caused significant distress to Ms X.

Assistance with moving

57. If the council owes the applicant a relief duty, it will have a duty to protect their belongings if the applicant’s property is in danger of loss or damage because the applicant is unable to protect it; and no other suitable arrangements have been made. This is often referred to as a storage duty, as councils usually satisfy this duty by arranging for the applicant’s property to be stored, for which it can make a charge. This is an ongoing duty, which continues to apply whilst homelessness duties are owed and may continue until after the homelessness duty has ended.
58. As an alternative, the law says a council can move the applicant’s property to a particular location requested by the applicant, at which point the duty to protect belongings comes to an end. Mr Y says this means a council should assist an applicant moving to interim or temporary accommodation, or moving between accommodation whilst a homelessness duty is owed.
59. I am not persuaded this is correct. The point of this alternative appears to be a one-off move, before which a council would have had to warn the applicant that following the move it would no longer have a duty to protect belongings, giving the applicant the chance to opt for storage instead.
60. The Council said it sought assistance with moving for Ms X from a local church, although I have not seen a record to confirm this. And although Ms X incurred some costs in moving between accommodation, Mr Y has not claimed any belongings were lost or damaged as a result of any lack of assistance. Further, it is not our role to interpret the law, and I cannot find fault with the Council on the basis of Mr Y’s interpretation of it. Therefore, I make no finding on this point.

Reasonable adjustments

61. Councils are under a duty to be proactive in making reasonable adjustments to assist service users to access their services. Mr Y says this means the Council should have taken steps to minimise the number of moves Ms X had to make, that any moves should be planned, and Ms X should be given notice so she and her son could prepare for them.
62. It is clear the Council was aware that Ms X has mental health issues and her son has autism. I have seen no specific request to the Council to minimise moves or provide notice to enable Ms X to plan for any moves.
63. It is not my role to say whether the Council was in breach of the Equality Act. That is a decision for the courts. However, I can find fault where a council has not had “due regard” to its equality duties.
64. It is in the nature of interim and temporary accommodation that there may need to be moves, which are dictated by the housing available. In this case, the Council said it initially provided interim accommodation outside its area because that was all that was available. In line with its policy, it moved Ms X to property 3, in her preferred area as soon as it could. It later discharged its relief duty by offering the accommodation at property 4. The Council was not in a position to predict when accommodation would become available and acted in line with Ms X’s wishes when moving her from property 2 to property 3. On balance, although I appreciate Ms X would have preferred not to move so many times, I do not find the Council was at fault for moving her, nor do I find it failed to have “due regard” to its equality duties.

Advice about accepting property 4

65. Ms X said the Council pressured her into accepting this offer by saying she risked her children being removed if she refused it. The Council says its officer would not have given that advice, although it has not been able to provide a record of the advice given. The failure to keep a proper record of the advice given was fault.
66. I have spoken to Ms X, who provided a credible account of the advice given and I have no reason to doubt this. I note she reported her version of events to Mr Y soon afterwards, which he included in the formal complaint he later made on her behalf, and that her account has remained consistent. I have no reason to doubt her account.
67. I also note the Council did not send her a letter explaining why it considered property 4 was suitable and explain the consequences of refusing, as it should have done. This means Ms X had no information on which to base her decision other than the advice she was given orally, and so she could not make an informed decision.
68. On balance, I find the Council gave inappropriate advice when offering property 4, which caused Ms X distress, and failed to provide advice in writing, which meant she did not have the information needed to make an informed choice about whether to accept the offer.

Complaints handling

69. The Council accepted it failed to issue either its stage 1 or stage 2 complaint responses within the timescales set out in its policy.
70. In its complaint response, the Council said it was not unreasonable for assessments to be carried out and an application accepted on 17 December, especially as that period included a weekend. However, as explained above, the law says a duty to arrange interim accommodation arises where a council has “reason to believe” and not at some later point when it has made enquiries and decides it is “satisfied” the applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need. Therefore, this part of the complaint response was incorrect.
71. Also, in its complaint response, the Council said the duty to protect belongings did not apply to homelessness duties. This was also incorrect.
72. I therefore find fault with the Council’s complaints handling. The Council has offered to pay Ms X £200, and this is appropriate to remedy the frustration caused and avoidable time and trouble she and Mr Y were put to in pursuing the matter.

Back to top

Agreed action

73. Within one month of the date of the final decision, the Council will:
1. apologise for the injustice caused by its delay in providing interim accommodation, its inappropriate advice about refusing the offer of property 4, and its failure to send a letter explaining why property 4 was suitable and the consequences of refusing it;
2. pay Ms X £500 for the distress caused as a result of being left at risk of harm and the lost opportunity to make an informed decision about whether to accept property 4, and a further £200 for the frustration and avoidable time and trouble caused by the failings in the complaints process. This makes a total payment of £700.
74. Within three months of the date of the final decision, the Council will share the final decision statement with relevant staff and specifically remind them of the need to ensure that:
1. interim accommodation is arranged as soon as the “reason to believe” threshold is reached;
2. full and accurate records are kept of advice given in housing cases; and
3. a letter is sent to applicants where the Council is offering accommodation to discharge the relief duty explaining why it considers the property offered is suitable for the household and the consequences of refusing the offer.
75. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

76. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault causing personal injustice. I have recommended action to remedy the injustice and prevent recurrence of the fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman