Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council handled his homelessness applications. He said the Council’s actions impacted his mental health. There was fault in the way the Council was not clear why it offered Mr X accommodation, did not accept a review request and delays in the complaint process. The fault we identified raised Mr X’s expectations and he was frustrated by the delays. The Council should apologise, make a financial payment and provide guidance to relevant staff.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council handled his homelessness applications. He said the Council’s actions impacted his mental health.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a Council’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 read Mr X’s complaint and spoke to him about it on the phone.
5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. Mr 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

Background information

7. 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.
8. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance says, rather than advise the applicant to return when homelessness is more imminent, the housing authority may wish to accept a prevention duty and begin to take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)
9. Councils must provide to anyone in their district information and advice free of charge on:
• preventing homelessness;
• securing accommodation when homeless;
• the rights of people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness;
• the duties of the authority;
• any help that is available from the authority or anyone else, for people in the council’s district who are homeless or may become homeless (whether or not they are threatened with homelessness); and
• how to access that help.
10. 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)
11. 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)
12. 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 (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
13. 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)
14. 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. All letters must include information about the right to request a review and the timescale for doing so. (Housing Act 1996, section 184, Homelessness Code of Guidance 18.30)
15. The Council complaint policy states it would provide a response to complaints within ten working days or explain any delays.
16. The Council had the wrong number for Mr X, so communication was difficult at first.

What happened

17. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
18. Mr X moved to the Council area in December 2022. He approached the Council to request accommodation as he was homeless. The Council accommodated Mr X in a hotel for four nights under its severe weather emergency protocol.
19. The Council assessed Mr X at the end of December 2022. The Council accommodated Mr X in a hotel again under its severe weather emergency protocol.
20. The Council wrote to Mr X at the start of January 2023. It told him it did not owe him a housing duty. The Council wrote to Mr X’s previous Council, referring him for homelessness support.
21. The Council emailed Mr X a letter in January 2023, to offer him accommodation under its severe weather emergency protocol again, when the previous placement ended. It wrote this letter under the heading of a section 188 notice, referencing interim accommodation.
22. Mr X’s previous Council accepted the referral in the middle of January 2023.
23. The Council ended Mr X’s placement in a hotel at the end of January 2023. Mr X complained and said the Council had not assessed his case properly. Mr X asked the Council review its decision. The Council told Mr X to contact a team to consider the review request. Mr X did not contact the team and found private rented accommodation.
24. Mr X complained to the Council again in May 2023. He complained the Council placed him in a hotel under section 188 but then removed him from the hotel.
25. The Council responded to the complaint at the end of June 2023. The response said it accommodated Mr X under its severe weather emergency protocol not a section 188 duty. The response stated it only used the section 188 letter as a template for the wording in the letter. The Council confirmed it determined Mr X did not have a local connection and referred him to his previous Council to support him, which it accepted.
26. Mr X asked the Council for help again in July 2023. He said he was homeless and needed help. The Council repeated his previous Council had a duty to Mr X. The Council agreed to complete an assessment. Mr X did not attend the first meeting.
27. Mr X asked the Council to escalate his complaint to stage two at the end of July 2023. He said the Council did not record his telephone number correctly and this meant he had issues with communication.
28. The Council responded to the stage two complaint in August 2023. The Council explained it provided Mr X with accommodation under its severe weather emergency protocol. The Council said there was no evidence Mr X missed an offer of accommodation because of the error in the telephone number and confirmed he used all three accommodation offers. The response confirmed Mr X had the right of review, but he did not use it. The Council repeated the previous Council accepted the referral because he had a local connection there. The Council did not uphold Mr X’s complaint.
29. Mr X attended a meeting to assess his homelessness application in September 2023. The Council told Mr X he was not in priority need a week later. It said it owed him a duty to help him find accommodation but did not have a duty to provide him with accommodation.
30. Mr X found private rented accommodation and the Council sent a letter to Mr X in November 2023 ending its relief duty to him.
31. Mr X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Mr X would like the Council to financially compensate him.
32. In response to my enquiries the Council stated it provided the accommodation to Mr X under its severe weather emergency protocol. It said it did not have any duty to accommodate him and referred him to the Council where he had a local connection.

My findings

33. Mr X said the Council did not record his correct telephone number and this caused him to miss communication. I have no evidence from when Mr X provided the number, so I cannot say what caused this error. I have seen the Council did communicate with Mr X using email as well as text messages, so it did communicate with him.
34. The Council assessed Mr X’s homelessness applications when he presented as homeless. It assessed he did not have a local connection using the information Mr X provided. It is for the Council to decide if an applicant meets the criteria for support. The Council was not at fault.
35. The Council referred Mr X to the Council where he had a local connection, who accepted the referral. The Council referred the case to the appropriate Council and told Mr X of its decision. The Council was not at fault.
36. However, Mr X asked the Council to review this decision. It told him to contact a different team in the Council. Mr X did not approach the team because he sourced private rental accommodation. It is best practice for the Council to send the review request to the appropriate service. This is fault, but Mr X secured accommodation before the Council would have completed the review, so I cannot say there was any significant injustice from this fault.
37. The Council provided accommodation to Mr X under its severe weather emergency protocol, but the correspondence did not clearly state this. This is fault and raised Mr X’s expectations the Council owed him the main housing duty.

Complaint handling

38. The Council policy states it would respond to complaints within ten working days.
39. Mr X complained in January 2023 and the Council did not register the complaint. This is fault.
40. Mr X complained again in May 2023. The Council took 39 working days to respond. I have seen no evidence of communication about the delay. This delay is fault.
41. Mr X asked the Council to escalate his complaint in July 2023. The Council took 16 days to respond. I have seen no evidence of communication about the delay. This delay is fault.

Back to top

Agreed action

42. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Mr X by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Mr X for not clearly stating why it was offering him accommodation and not detailing the limited basis of the offer. This apology should be in accordance with the Ombudsman’s new guidance Making an effective apology.
• Pay Mr X £150 as an acknowledgement of the time and trouble he has spent pursuing this complaint.
• Remind relevant staff of the importance of effective complaint handling.
• Remind relevant staff of the need to be clear when communicating actions with applicants.
• Remind relevant staff when they receive a review request, it is best practice for the officer to forward the request to the relevant team, rather than requesting the applicant resend the request.
43. The Council should provide evidence of the actions taken to satisfy the recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

44. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Mr X.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman