Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his homelessness application and failure to provide interim accommodation. We find the Council at fault which caused Mr X avoidable uncertainty, frustration, distress, and expenses. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X, make him a symbolic payment for the injustice caused, refund his avoidable expenses, and provide a staff reminder.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his homelessness application. He says the Council:
1. Did not process his evidence which delayed his homelessness application.
2. Did not provide interim accommodation for him and his family when he provided it with a notice of eviction.
3. Did not provide interim accommodation for him and his family after they were evicted and attended the Council’s offices on eviction day.
4. Provided him with unsuitable temporary accommodation.
2. Mr X says he and his family were consequently left homeless, lost their belongings from his previous address and he incurred expenses arranging accommodation. He says he also experienced uncertainty, distress trying to resolve the situation with the Council.

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. 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 and have not investigated

6. I have investigated Mr X’s compliant strands as set out at paragraphs 1(a), 1(b) and 1(c).
7. I have not investigated Mr X’s complaint strand as set out a paragraph 1 (d). This is because Mr X had a statutory right to review of the suitability of his temporary accommodation and further right to appeal to the magistrate’s court if he was unhappy with the review outcome. Mr X did not use these alternative remedies and I consider it reasonable for him to have done so as explained at paragraph 4 (above).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I have considered information provided by Mr X. I also considered information received from the Council.
9. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and statutory guidance

10. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the council on or after 3 April 2018:
• they are likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• they have been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5)

Homelessness applications

11. If a council has reason to believe an applicant may be homeless it must make inquiries to satisfy itself what, if any, duty it owes them. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 (1)
12. While a Council is carrying out inquiries in an applicant’s case it must also secure accommodation for the applicant and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. This is called interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 188
13. After completing inquiries, the council must give the applicant a decision in writing. If it is an adverse decision, the letter must fully explain the reasons. (Housing Act 1996, section 184, from 3 April 2018 Homelessness Code of Guidance 18.32 and 18.33)
14. Homeless applicants may request a review by the Council within 21 days of the decision on their homelessness application. And if still dissatisfied, can appeal to the county court on a point of law. (Homelessness Code of Guidance section 25)

The prevention duty

15. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help the applicants to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. In deciding what steps, they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

The relief duty

16. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides, this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

The main housing duty

17. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation. Generally, the council carries out the duty by arranging temporary accommodation until it makes a suitable offer of social housing or private rented accommodation. (s.193 Housing Act 1996)
18. The LGSCO’s Principles of Good Administrative Practice says we expect councils to be open and accountable. This includes keeping accurate and well-maintained records, clearly explaining the rationale for decisions and updating service users in a reasonable timeframe of any changes to their assigned point of contact and communication methods and reasons for any unexpected delays.

What happened

19. In early March 2023, Mr X approached the Council for homelessness assistance after receiving a section 21 notice from his private landlord. The landlord wanted to reclaim the property due to rent arrears.
20. In late March 2023, the Council assessed Mr X’s homelessness. The assigned case worker (CW1) emailed Mr X requesting further supporting information including identity documents, bank statements, proof of benefits and inability to work.
21. A few days later, the Council accepted a homelessness prevention duty to Mr X and provided him with a personal housing plan (PHP). The Council also contacted Mr X’s landlord with a view to sustaining his tenancy by paying off Mr X’s rent arrears, but the landlord refused.
22. In early April 2023 CW1 emailed Mr X again to request the outstanding documents and advised him to continue searching for alternative properties.
23. In May 2023 the Council received evidence from Mr X confirming his landlord had started court proceedings to evict him. The Council assigned a new case worker (CW2) as CW1 had left post.
24. CW2 again requested the outstanding information from Mr X and sent further forms for Mr X to complete. Mr X explained he had already provided the requested information to CW1.
25. In June 2023 Mr X uploaded some of the requested documents onto his online housing file. He then called the Council to confirm they had been received.
26. In mid-August 2023 the Council emailed Mr X again and requested the outstanding documents which were received a few days later.
27. In late September 2023, the Council assigned a third caseworker (CW3) to Mr X’s case. Mr X also contacted the Council to advise his eviction date had been set for mid-October 2023 and provided a copy of the notice. He explained his family were feeling very distressed and wanted to secure emergency accommodation before the date. The records do not show a response to Mr X’s communication from the Council.
28. In mid-October 2023, Mr X and his family were evicted from their home.
29. Mr X then arranged emergency accommodation for himself using an online rental application for 20 days. He placed his wife and children with a family member, who later advised the Council they could no longer host them as the property was severely overcrowded.
30. Throughout early November 2023, Mr X called the Council multiple times and left messages for CW3 to contact him urgently about his housing situation, without response.
31. In mid- November 2023 the Council accepted its relief duty to Mr X and placed him and his family in interim accommodation due to his priority need.

Mr X’s complaint

32. In December 2023, Mr X complained to the Council, he said:
• He provided the documents requested by CW1 and CW2 on multiple occasions, but they failed to process the evidence and delayed his assessment.
• He made the Council aware of his eviction on numerous occasions between March 2023 and October 2023, but it failed to take necessary action to prevent his family becoming street homeless on eviction day.
• He attended the Council offices as advised on his eviction day but was turned away. This was because there was an earlier security incident and members of the public without appointments were restricted from entry.
• He therefore had to rent a home for 20 days and incurred £1200 in expenses and his family including his wife and two children had to stay with a friend in overcrowded conditions.
• The Council had ignored him during a challenging time which resulted in him losing his job and his family experienced significant distress.

The Council’s complaint responses

33. In its stage one response, the Council:
• Explained there was a change in Mr X’s case worker after CW1 left post and CW2 therefore requested documents again. The Council apologised if he had already provided the documents.
• CW3 had met with Mr X and subsequently placed him and his family in interim accommodation after he provided all the required information.
34. In its stage two response, the Council:
• Confirmed it had no record of Mr X being advised to or attending the Council offices on his eviction day. Its records say he attended around three weeks later and was subsequently placed in interim accommodation after he provided the requested documents.
• Accepted Mr X placed his family with a friend and rented a home for himself for two weeks in a bed and breakfast following his eviction.
• Confirmed CW3 had not received Mr X’s emails in the above period as Mr X had been provided with their incorrect email address. It apologised for the oversight.
35. Unhappy with the Council’s response, Mr X approached the Ombudsman in late January 2024.

The Council’s response to our enquiries

36. The Council said:
• It accepted the allocation of different housing officers to Mr X’s case was not ideal, but the changes had to happen due to staff turnover and workload.
• It should have communicated better when there was a change-over of officers and in particular that applicants must be informed within days rather than weeks of the change in their housing officers.
• It does not have any proof that Mr X approached it on his eviction day.

Was there fault and did it cause injustice?

i) Mr X says the Council did not process his evidence and delayed his homelessness application.

37. The Council initially followed the corrects steps after Mr X’s approach for homelessness assistance in March 2023.The Council assessed Mr X’s situation, made further enquiries, and accepted a homelessness prevention duty in line with the law as explained at paragraphs 10, 11 and 15 (above). It discussed Mr X’s circumstances with his landlord and tried to maintain Mr X’s tenancy by offering to pay off rental arrears, but the landlord was unwilling to accept. I do not find fault with the Council’s initial response.
38. In April 2023, the Council then asked Mr X to provide supporting information to progress its enquiries and process his homelessness application. The focus of Mr X’s complaint is that he provided this information on many occasions, but the Council did not upload it onto its system which caused delays. The available records show Mr X did provide some information in June 2023 and the remaining documents by August 2023. Mr X also remained in contact with the Council in September 2023 and provided evidence to confirm he would be evicted in mid-October 2023 and explained he was distressed by the situation. The records do not show the Council responding to Mr X’s communications.
39. The Council has explained this was due to a change in Mr X’s caseworker in May 2023 and August 2023. This meant Mr X’s communications were missed by the allocated officers dealing with his case. In its complaint response the Council also accepted there had been an oversight and apologised. However, the records also show Mr X telephoned the Council and left messages asking for help in view of his imminent eviction which were not adequately followed up. In my view, the Council’s handling of Mr X’s homelessness application between late June 2023 and mid-October 2023 was poor service and amounts to fault. The Council has not provided a reasonable explanation for the error in processing Mr X’s documents and the subsequent delay in reaching a decision about his homelessness. It is also inconsistent with the Ombudsman’s Principles of Good Administrative Practice. This caused Mr X inconvenience as he had to upload information on multiple occasions and experienced uncertainty, distress, and frustration about his potential eviction and whether the Council was going to arrange suitable accommodation for him and his family. This is injustice.

ii) Mr X says the Council did not provide interim accommodation for him and his family when he provided it with a notice of eviction

40. Mr X believes the Council’s failure to properly consider his repeated communications including the eviction notice in late September and emails after he was evicted, meant the Council did not reach an earlier decision that he was in priority need (due to his dependent children) and provide interim accommodation.
41. Based on the available evidence, I am inclined to agree with Mr X as the Council had by that point received all the information requested from Mr X. The Council also accepted it provided Mr X with an incorrect email address for its assigned caseworker (CW3). I note the Council eventually sought the same information from Mr X after he approached it again in mid-November 2023.
42. On this occasion, it decided Mr X and his family were in priority need and arranged interim accommodation. I see no reasonable reason, given there had been no change to Mr X’s circumstances, why the Council could not have reached this decision earlier in September 2023. The Council’s failure to do so is inconsistent with its duties as set out at paragraph 13 (above) and is fault. This meant Mr X and his family were left without suitable accommodation between mid-October 2023 and mid-November 2023 which caused them avoidable distress and inconvenience. It also meant Mr X had to arrange emergency accommodation for his family and incurred expenses accommodating himself as it was not possible for him to stay with his family. This is injustice.

iii) Mr X says the Council did not provide interim accommodation for him and his family after they were evicted and attended the Council’s offices on eviction day.

43. I understand Mr X says he attended the Council offices with his family on eviction day to speak in person with his allocated caseworker. He explained he was advised to do so but was refused entry. I have no reason to doubt Mr X’s account, but our investigations and findings are based on the available evidence, which does not mention this series of events. Mr X was also unable to provide any independent evidence. Accordingly, I am unable to reach a finding in relation to this aspect of Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Agreed action

44. Within one month of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Write to Mr X and apologise for:
• Its failure to process evidence he provided and subsequent delays in processing his homelessness assessment and any avoidable uncertainty, distress and inconvenience caused to him.
• Its failure to respond to Mr X’s communications about his eviction and delay in reaching a decision about his housing priority need and suitability for interim accommodation and any avoidable frustration, distress and inconvenience caused.
1. Make a symbolic payment of £300 to Mr X in recognition of the avoidable uncertainty, distress and frustration caused to him by the faults identified in this statement.
2. Refund Mr X the amount he incurred for his emergency accommodation on production of suitable evidence of costs.
3. Provide a reminder to staff dealing with homelessness applications to send updated contact information to service users when there is a change in allocated caseworkers.
45. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

46. I find the Council at fault which caused Mr X avoidable uncertainty, frustration, distress, and avoidable expenses. The Council should apologise to Mr X, make him a symbolic payment for the injustice caused, refund his avoidable expenses, and provide a staff reminder.
47. The Council has accepted my recommendations and I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman