Summary: There was no fault in how the Council dealt with Miss X’s homelessness. It offered suitable interim accommodation and accepted a relief duty. Miss X can appeal to court about the Council’s decision that she is not homeless because of domestic abuse and so is not in priority need.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about how the Council dealt with her homelessness. In particular, she says the Council:
1. Provided interim accommodation for only one night then offered further unsuitable interim accommodation
2. Advised her to approach a different council
3. Decided she was not in priority need while the relief duty was ongoing
4. Wrongly decided she was not in priority need
2. As a result, Miss X says she remains homeless and experienced avoidable distress.

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 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)
5. 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 not investigated

6. I have not investigated the complaint at point d) in paragraph one. Miss X used her statutory right to review the decision she was not in priority need. She has a right to appeal the outcome of the review in court. It is reasonable for Miss X to use this right and so I have not exercised discretion to investigate this part of the complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered the complaint and the information Miss X and the Council provided.
8. I referred to relevant law and guidance, including the Housing Act 1996, as amended, and the homelessness Code of Guidance.
9. Miss 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

Homelessness law and guidance

10. 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.
11. 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)
12. If a council has reason to believe an applicant may be homeless because of domestic abuse, it should make interim accommodation available to the applicant immediately whilst it undertakes its investigations. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 21.25)
13. If an applicant refuses an offer of interim accommodation, the council does not have a duty to provide any other interim accommodation. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.22)
14. If councils are satisfied applicants are homeless and eligible for assistance, they must take reasonable steps to help the applicant secure accommodation. This is called the relief duty. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing. The relief duty usually lasts 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
15. Councils can complete inquiries into whether it will owe the main housing duty during the relief duty. However, councils must continue to help people under the relief duty. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 13.9)
16. If a council decides an applicant is not in priority need during the relief duty, it will no longer owe a duty to provide interim accommodation. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.9)
17. Certain decisions councils make about homelessness carry a statutory right of review. The review decision then carries a right of appeal to court on a point of law. Homeless applicants have a right to review a decision they are not in priority need. (Housing Act 1996, s202)

What happened

18. Miss X approached the Council in early September 2023. She said she was fleeing domestic abuse from family members.
19. The Council’s out of hours service provided interim accommodation for a night. The Council accepted the relief duty the next day. It had reason to believe Miss X might be in priority need because of domestic abuse. It arranged a place for Miss X at a refuge outside the Council’s area. The records say Miss X accepted this offer but then refused it when the refuge contacted her.
20. In mid-September, the Council wrote to Miss X with its decision she was not in priority need. This was because Miss X provided new information which contradicted her earlier statements. The letter said it would continue to owe the relief duty to Miss X. Miss X sought a review of this decision.

My findings

Interim accommodation

21. The Council had reason to believe Miss X might be in priority need. It therefore had a duty to provide interim accommodation while it made inquiries.
22. The Council met this duty by providing emergency accommodation overnight through its out of hours service. It then arranged a refuge place for Miss X outside its area.
23. Miss X says the refuge was unsuitable because it was too far away. The Council’s policy says interim accommodation might be outside the area, and outside London, unless there is a particular need to remain in the council’s area. Miss X did not want to stay in the Council’s area as she said she was unsafe. The refuge was in a location with good public transport links. There is no fault in the Council’s decision the refuge was suitable interim accommodation for Miss X.
24. When Miss X refused the offer, the Council had no further duty to provide accommodation.

Advice to approach a different council

25. Miss X says the Council told her to withdraw her homeless application and approach a different council.
26. Miss X told the Council she was not safe in its area because of the risk of domestic abuse from her family. In the circumstances, it was appropriate for the Council to tell Miss X about her right to approach a different council for help. There was no fault by the Council.
27. In any event, the Council did not prevent Miss X from pursuing a homeless application and accepted a duty to her so there is no injustice to Miss X.

Timing of non-priority need decision

28. Miss X says the Council should not have decided she was not in priority need while it owed her the relief duty.
29. The code of guidance says councils can decide that someone is not in priority need while it owes the relief duty. There was no fault in the Council deciding Miss X was not in priority need when it did.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I have completed my investigation. The Council was not at fault.

Investigator’s draft decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman