Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council dealt with her housing benefit application, a homelessness application, served a hazard awareness notice on her landlord and responded to her complaints causing distress. We have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council issued a hazard awareness notice on Ms X’s landlord. The Council has accepted it was at fault in responding to Ms X’s complaints about its actions. It has already apologised and offered a payment to acknowledge the time and trouble caused. We have ended our investigation into Ms X’s complaints about her housing benefit application and homelessness application as Ms X has rights of appeal about the decisions made. So we have completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the way the Council dealt with her housing situation which led to her landlord serving notice on her to leave the property. Ms X says this caused distress to her and her household and impacted onto their health. In particular Ms X complains:
• The landlord issued them with a rent increase and new tenancy agreement which they could only sign if the Council agreed to pay extra housing benefit to cover the increased rent. But the Council delayed dealing with her housing benefit claim for five months. This led to a decline in her relationship with the landlord who served her with notice to leave the property. Ms X says they are now unable to get a tenant reference from landlord making it difficult to find an alternative private rented property.
• The property Ms X was living in was overgrown with ivy due to the Council’s failure to maintain a plot of land it owned next door. This led to the property having damp and mould which the landlord did not treat. Ms X says she could not use certain rooms although landlord asked her to pay full rent for the property. Ms X says she and the landlord have been asking the Council to maintain the waste land and clear the overgrown ivy for three years.
• The Council served landlord with a Hazard Awareness Notice (HAN) to clear the disrepair due to an insurance matter between landlord and Council. Ms X says there were other more suitable notices the Council should have used to require the landlord to take action. And the more severe sanctions would have prevented the landlord being able to evict them from the property while a notice was in place. Ms X alleges the Council’s action with the HAN added to the breakdown of her relationship with the landlord.
• The Council’s Homeless team were unhelpful and said they could only move her and her family into a hotel with no facilities. Ms X says she has difficulty bidding for properties as she has not been awarded a high enough housing priority.
• The Council delayed dealing with her complaints and ignored her requests to escalate to stage 2 of the Council’s complaint procedure.
2. Ms X wants the Council to apologise, compensate them and rehouse them in a property immediately within the Council’s area and housing stock as she holds it responsible for their eviction.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended). The Social Entitlement Chamber (also known as the Social Security Appeal Tribunal) is a tribunal that considers housing benefit appeals. (The Social Entitlement Chamber of the First Tier Tribunal)
5. 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)
6. 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)
7. 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

8. I have investigated Ms X’s concerns about her housing benefit application, homelessness application, the HAN and Council’s complaints procedure from 2023 onwards. I have not investigated Ms X’s complaint the Council has failed to maintain the land before 2023. This is because the complaint about this is late as Ms X has been aware of the matter for the last three years. I consider it reasonable to expect Ms X to have complained to us before now if she was unhappy with Council’s response to requests to maintain the land.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I spoke to Ms X and considered the information she provided with her complaint. I considered information from the Council and the supporting documents it provided along with the relevant law and guidance.
10. 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

Housing benefit

11. What follows is a brief chronology of key events about Ms X’s housing benefit application. It does not contain all the information I reviewed during my investigation.
12. Ms X privately rents her property from a landlord and has received housing benefit towards her rent for some years. In February 2023 her landlord asked her to sign a new tenancy agreement with a rent increase. The landlord then issued Ms X with a s21 notice requiring her to leave the property. Ms X submitted a change in circumstances notification for her housing benefit claim to the Council in February 2023 about the rent increase.
13. The Council sent Ms X a review form to complete on 31 January 2023. The form asked Ms X to complete and return the form within 30 days. The Council sent Ms X a reminder on 24 February 2023. It says it did not suspend or end her claim then. Ms X telephoned the Council on 8 March 2023 about her landlord’s rent increase and s21 notice. The Council advised Ms X to complete an online review form.
14. The Council received the completed review form on 10 March 2023. In April Ms X asked the Council why it had reduced her housing benefit payment while her rent had increased. The Council advised it was due to an increase in her partner’s earnings. Ms X sent further documents to support her claim in May 2023. The Council sought information about the income of Ms X’s partner and completed the review on 18 May 2023. The Council confirms it completed the review within two weeks of receiving all Ms X’s information to support the claim. Ms X submitted a reconsideration request about the income used to calculate her claim.
15. The Council reassessed the claim, increased the benefit awarded and sent her a payment to cover an underpayment of housing benefit. While it increased the housing benefit it paid Ms X this was to the maximum amount it could pay according to the Local Housing Allowance (LHA). The increase did not cover all Ms X’s rent. The Council sent Ms X notification letters showing it assessed her housing benefit entitlement using the correct LHA rates.
16. In December 2023 the landlord advised Ms X was in rent arrears and wanted the Council to pay the rent directly to them. The Council asked Ms X to provide evidence she was up to date with her rent. The Council says it did suspend her claim then because of this and being advised she was due to be evicted from the property. The Council reopened the claim when the eviction did not go ahead, and Ms X remained in the property.

The Council’s response to complaints about Housing Benefit

17. The Council did not consider the housing benefit team delayed dealing with her claim. It confirms the housing benefit team would not be able to advise tenants as to whether they should sign tenancy agreements as it is not a function it performs. The Council says it would have been appropriate for Ms X to seek independent legal advice if she had any reservations about signing the new tenancy agreement and accepting the rent increase. Or any other outstanding matters between her and the landlord.
18. The Council advised Ms X that if her contract states the amount for the property then she was liable to pay the amount even if she considered she could not use some rooms. If she considered the rooms were uninhabitable and reduced rent payments the landlord would be able to pursue her for any money she owed through the courts. A judge would then decide on the issue.

My assessment

19. Housing benefit is means tested benefit taking into account both an applicant’s capital and income. It may not cover the full rent if it exceeds the ‘eligible rent’. This is according to the Local Housing Allowance (LHA) rules which limit the amount payable for private sector rentals.
20. Most housing benefit decisions have the right of appeal, and an applicant can ask for a reconsideration as an internal review. There is then the right of appeal to the independent benefits tribunal (the Social Security Appeal Tribunal). Decisions which can be appealed include all decisions on the amount of benefit and its calculation, treatment of income and capital, overpayments, and decisions about who to pay.
21. The documents provided show the Council responded to information from Ms X about her change in circumstances with the rent increase. The Council determined the housing benefit claim on the information available as required. It lowered the housing benefit award accordingly. Ms X has been able to seek a reconsideration of her claim and submit further information. The Council reassessed the claim and sent Ms X a payment for underpaid benefit as it agreed an increase. This was to the maximum level of LHA payable.
22. Ms X has alleged the Council delayed in dealing with her claim, but I have not found any evidence of undue delay. The Council has commented the housing benefit team could not advise her about signing a new tenancy agreement or the rent increase. The Council can only review a claim when it receives all the information it needs to make a decision. Ms X has been able to request a review of the decision about her housing benefit claim. It was also open to Ms X to exercise her right of appeal to the Tribunal if she disagreed with the Council’s decision.
23. As paragraph four explains we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. I consider it was reasonable to expect Ms X to exercise her right of appeal to the Tribunal in this case. This is because it can assess Ms X’s claim and decide if the Council has made the correct decision. So, I have ended my investigation into this part of Ms X’s complaint.

Hazard Awareness Notice (HAN)

24. What follows is a brief chronology of key events about the HAN. It does not contain all the information I reviewed during my investigation.
25. In February 2023 the Council’s Environmental Health (EH) team arranged a visit to Ms X’s property. The landlord advised the EH officer there was an insurance claim against the Council. This was for damage due to plant growth over the property from the land next door owned by the Council. The landlord also advised they had issued s21 eviction proceedings against Ms X due to wanting to increase rent payments to cover an increase in mortgage payments.
26. The EH officer visited in April 2023 and advised the landlord in June 2023 they intended to serve a HAN mainly due to the hazard identified from ivy covering the property. The EH officer noted other deficiencies such as the bathroom light flickering and missing overflow pipe in kitchen.
27. The Council issued the HAN in July 2023. The notice considered the enforcement options available to the Council and discounted them apart from the HAN. The Council commented in HAN Statement of Reasons: “The outcome of the insurance claim against the council will ultimately reduce or remove the hazard in this case and that is the most appropriate course of action to resolve this matter. Therefore, the service of a hazard awareness notice is the most appropriate option under the unique circumstances of this case”.
28. The Council sent Ms X a copy of the HAN information. Ms X queried using the HAN rather than any other enforcement action including an improvement notice which she says would have prevented the landlord evicting her while it was in place.

The Council’s response to complaints about the HAN

29. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaints and explained the reason for its decision as outlined in the HAN. In response to my enquiries, it explained that as well as following the Council’s policy, it followed statutory guidance under the Housing Act 2004 to consider the most appropriate course of action to deal with the Category 1 hazard identified. It considered an improvement notice would have been an appropriate course of action if the source of the hazard came from privately owned land. It appointed specialist loss adjusters when dealing with the insurance claim. The adjusters advised that while there was a duty on the property owner to maintain their property, the Council was responsible for maintaining the land in question at the same time. So, it made an offer to the owner/landlord which was accepted.
30. As the Council accepted some fault in this case it did not consider it appropriate or legally valid to serve an improvement notice on the Council. This is because it cannot serve a notice on itself. In addition, the issue was being dealt with under an insurance claim as a civil matter between the owner and the Council to rectify the overgrowth leading to the defects at the property.
31. The Council says any other type of enforcement action would not have affected the insurance claim, or the landlord’s ability to speed up the claim. So, such a notice was considered contrary to the Enforcement Policy which expects a fair application of enforcement tools. Where a landlord has a set of circumstances beyond their control, as in this case, the Council assesses those factors to ensure it applies the principle of fairness. This meant the HAN was the most appropriate course of action.
32. The Council says it would appear the landlord started eviction proceedings against Ms X before EH team involvement in this case according to the landlord. This was mentioned during the case officer’s conversation with the landlord in March 2023 where the mortgage payment increase was given as the reason for starting proceedings. This pre-dated the Council’s involvement and subsequent actions.

My assessment

33. The Council’s documents show it inspected the property and considered the ivy was causing a hazard, so it served a HAN on the landlord. The Council explained why it chose the HAN in the statement of reasons part of the notice. Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision to serve the HAN, but the decision is a matter of the officer’s professional judgement. We cannot question the merits of the decision itself without evidence of fault in the way it was made. I do not consider there is fault in this case.
34. This is because the officer considered the information and evidence provided by Ms X, visits to the property and the enforcement options available to the Council. The officer considered the HAN was the most appropriate option. This is a decision the Council is entitled to make. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council decided to serve an HAN.

Homelessness

35. What follows is a brief chronology of key events about Ms X’s homelessness application. It does not contain all the information I reviewed during my investigation.
36. Ms X made a homelessness application to the Council in March 2023 due to receiving a s21 notice from her landlord requiring her to leave the property. The application was allocated to an officer who assessed the case in May 2023. The officer triggered a prevention duty to Ms X to try and see how the Council could prevent her homelessness. It was noted Ms X did not want to go into B&B accommodation.
37. The Council reactivated Ms X’s housing register application in July 2023 and Ms X reported receiving a notice for possession from the landlord. In November 2023 the courts considered the landlord’s claim for possession and agreed the order. Ms X was asked to leave the property by 23 November 2023. The Council accepted a relief duty towards Ms X in January 2024. In February 2024 Ms X advised she was still residing at the property.
38. The Council has 56 days under the relief duty to take reasonable steps to help the applicant to secure accommodation. The 56 days in Ms X’s case ended on ended on 4 March 2024 and the Council accepted a main housing duty towards Ms X on 22 March 2024. It advised her to continue working with her housing adviser and to look for suitable properties. The Council allocated Ms X ‘Priority Homeseeker’ status for her housing register application. It advised she could bid for properties within that category. Ms X advised in May 2024 she had an eviction date for August 2024. The Council allocated Ms X temporary accommodation in August 2024 following the eviction. Ms X considers the accommodation unsuitable due to its distance from work and school for the family.

Council response to complaint about homelessness application

39. The Council accepts there was a short delay between the relief duty ending and accepting the main housing duty towards Ms X. It apologised to Ms X for the delay due to an increase in homelessness applications, staff absence and shortage creating a backlog.

My assessment

40. The documents provided show the Council accepted a homelessness application from Ms X. It accepted a prevention duty, then the relief duty and main housing duty according to the requirements of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance. The Council issued decisions at each stage it accepted a duty which will have advised Ms X of her right to review and then appeal a decision to the county court if she disagreed. As paragraph five explains 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. I consider it was reasonable to expect Ms X to exercise her right of appeal about the decisions on her homelessness application. This is because the courts can consider the decisions made on Ms X’s homelessness application and decide if the Council has made the correct decision. So, I have ended my investigation into this part of Ms X’s complaint.
41. The Council has acknowledged a three-week delay in accepting a main duty. This is fault by the Council as it should make a decision by day 57 after the relief duty ends. But I do not consider this has caused Ms X a significant injustice to warrant pursuing the matter further. This is because Ms X remained living in the property and so had accommodation.
42. Once Ms X was evicted the Council offered her temporary accommodation where Ms X currently lives. Ms X says she is unhappy with the temporary accommodation. But as Ms X has the right to ask for a suitability review of the accommodation and then a right of appeal to the county court, we would expect her to use that right. This is because the courts can determine if the Council has offered her suitable temporary accommodation.

Complaints procedure

43. What follows is a brief chronology of key events about Ms X’s complaints to the Council. It does not contain all the information I reviewed during my investigation.
44. Ms X complained to the Council at stage 1 of the Council’s complaints procedure in August 2023 about its handling of her housing situation, benefits application, and the HAN. The Council responded in September 2023. Ms X complained again as she was unhappy with the response and considered the Council failed to respond to all her concerns. Ms X asked to go to stage 2 of the complaints procedure but says the Council ignored her request. Ms X complained to us in November 2023. We referred Ms X’s complaint to the Council to carry out a stage 2 investigation and complete the complaint procedure. In February 2024 the Council asked to respond to Ms X with a second stage 1 response as it accepted it not deal with all her concerns. We agreed to the Council’s request.
45. The Council responded to Ms X in April 2024 with a second stage 1 response. Ms X remained unhappy, so we asked the Council to now respond at stage 2. When the Council did not respond we reopened Ms X’s complaint in July 2024. The Council responded to Ms X in August 2024. Ms X remains unhappy at the outcome.

The Council’s response about dealing with Ms X’s complaints

46. The Council accepts the first stage 1 response in September 2023 did not respond to all the issues Ms X raised. And the investigating officer delayed responding to her second stage 1 complaint in April 2024. This is because its complaints policy says a 1 Stage 1 investigation response should be provided within 20 working days if more detailed consideration and decision on fault is required. If the complainant does not agree with the outcome, they may request a stage 2 response. The Council apologised to Ms X for the delay and for not responding to all the issues she raised. The Council offered Ms X a £200 payment for the inconvenience and trouble she experienced.
47. The Council accepts a delay in carrying out the stage 2 response. This is because its complaints policy says the Stage 2, a corporate complaint review, should be done by a different complaints officer to reconsider the actions and decisions taken at the previous stage. It should be done within 15 working days. In this case the Council says the delay was due to the nature and complexity of the complaint making Ms X’s review and response take longer than usual rather than a refusal to carry out the review. It offered Ms X a £300 payment for the delay in responding to the stage 2 which caused her additional concern and frustration. The Council confirms this is in addition to the £200 offered at stage 1 making a total remedy payment of £500 to Ms X.

My assessment

48. The Council has accepted delays in responding to Ms X’s complaints. The delays are fault by the Council as it has not complied with the timescales stated in the complaints policy. And so have caused an injustice to Ms X through her time and trouble in pursuing her complaints. It has apologised and offered Ms X a £500 payment as a remedy for the inconvenience and trouble she experienced. I consider this is a suitable remedy and I would not achieve anything more for Ms X through further investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

49. I have completed my investigation. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council issued a HAN on Ms X’s landlord. There is evidence of fault in the way the Council dealt with Ms X’s complaints about its actions. The Council has offered a suitable remedy in this case for the injustice caused. I have ended my investigation into Ms X’s complaints about her housing benefit application and homelessness application as Ms X has rights of appeal about the decisions made.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman