Summary: Miss X complains the Council failed to respond to her contacts and delayed assessing her homelessness application. We found there was fault and the apology and payment the Council offered to Miss X was a reasonable remedy to her complaint.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council:
• Delayed dealing with her homelessness application.
• Staff were uncontactable and failed to respond to numerous calls and emails she sent seeking an update on her housing register application and attempts to find hostel accommodation.
• Since the Council reached its decision and closed her case she has not been able to get in contact with the Council to give them updated medical information and to seek further information and advice.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future 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 spoke to Miss X and considered her complaint. I considered information the Council provided.
5. Miss 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

Housing Act 1996

Prevention and relief duty

6. If someone is homeless, or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, they can seek help from the housing authority. Where the person is threatened with homelessness, the prevention duty may apply. Where the person is actually homeless, the relief duty may apply.
7. Under the relief duty, the housing authority will need to carry out an assessment and work with the person to develop a personalised housing plan (PHP).

Duty to arrange interim accommodation

8. A council must secure interim accommodation for an applicant and their household if it has reason to believe the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)

What Happened

9. On 9 March Miss X completed an online housing self-assessment form. She provided some documents on 14 March and the Council assessed the application on 4 April.
10. The Council accepted there was a five-week delay in deciding whether it should accept a relief duty, during which it also failed to respond to Miss X’s telephone calls and requests for a call back.
11. The Council accepted a relief duty on 19 May 2023. Although it accepted a relief duty, the Council decided Miss X was not in priority need. As a result of this, it did not have a duty to provide accommodation. The Council sent Miss X a letter confirming its decision on 19 May by email. It also sent a Personalised Housing Plan (PHP). The Council’s letter explained Miss X had a right to request a review of its decision that she had no priority need.
12. Miss X complained that she had not been able to contact the Council to discuss her situation. At Stage One of the Council’s complaints process the Council noted there was a further failure to respond to a telephone call from Miss X after the Council issued its decision. it offered Miss X £50 in compensation for the delay.
13. On 24, 30 and 31 May and 19 June Miss X emailed council officers to get an update on her case. The Council did not reply to these contacts. It apologised for this in a further response to Miss X’s complaint at Stage Two of the complaints process. It stated this had been taken up with the officers concerned and it had recruited more staff. The Council also offered a further £50 in compensation.
14. On 23 June Miss X spoke to a council officer and explained her circumstances. The Council stated it had made referrals to hostels for Miss X but had not received a response. It agreed to inform her once a response was received.
15. Miss X complained to the Ombudsman at around the same time the Council replied to her complaint. She stated she now needed to update the Council with more information about her mental health. She stated she was unable to get hold of a council officer to update them and to receive advice and help. This did not form part of the original complaint Miss X made to the Council.

Was there fault by the Council

16. We found there was fault by the Council. It recognised in its complaint response that its communication had been poor and there had been delay reaching a decision in Miss X’s homelessness application. The Council apologised and offered a payment to Miss X in recognition of the impact the delay and communication issues had. These were actions that were in line with our guidance and represent a reasonable remedy to the complaint.
17. We have not investigated the further difficulty that Miss X subsequently raised about not being able to contact the Council to update officers about her mental health and get an update and advice about her housing situation. This is because this was not part of Miss X’s formal complaint to the Council. We asked the Council to make contact with Miss X to speak to her about her health, record any relevant details and, if appropriate, re-assess the situation. Also, to give Miss X any advice or information she needed.
18. As the Council adequately remedied the complaint we completed our investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

19. There was fault by the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman