Summary: We have found fault with the Council for the delay in issuing a formal homelessness decision letter. This delayed Miss X’s right to review and caused her avoidable distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise for this delay and pay Miss X £300 for the distress caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application after she fled domestic abuse.

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

What I have and have not investigated

4. I cannot investigate matters related to the Council’s decision that Miss X was not in priority need. Miss X requested a review, and the Council upheld its decision. It would have been reasonable for Miss X to have appealed to the courts.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered Miss X’s complaint and spoke to her about it.
6. I also considered the Council’s response to Miss X and to my enquiries.
7. 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

The law and guidance

8. 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.

The relief duty

9. 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)

Decision letters

10. 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)

Review rights

11. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of a decision including the decision:
• what duty (if any) is owed to them if they are found to be homeless or threatened with homelessness;
• they are not in priority need.

Review timescale and right of appeal

12. Councils must complete reviews of these decisions within eight weeks of the date of the review request.
13. These periods can be extended if the applicant agrees in writing.
14. The council must advise applicants of their right to appeal to the county court on a point of law, and of the period in which to appeal. Applicants can also appeal if the council takes more than the prescribed time to complete the review. (Housing Act 1996, sections 202, 203 and 204)

What happened

15. Miss X approached the Council because her landlord had issued a Section 21 eviction notice. She said, she moved out of her accommodation on the date on the eviction notice. She said the Council did not tell her she did not have to leave by that date. The Council said that it does not tell individuals that they need to leave on the date of an eviction notice. Miss X made a homelessness and a housing register application.
16. The Council verbally accepted the relief duty and issued Miss X with a personalised housing plan (PHP). The Council told Miss X she was not in priority need. Miss X asked the Council to review this decision.
17. Six months later, Miss X complained to the Council. She said it had not provided a formal decision letter and it did not respond to her review request.
18. In the Council’s response, it apologised for the mismanaging her case. It explained that Miss X’s original caseworker had left the Council and that their replacement had also left. It said it would issue a decision letter so that Miss X could request a review.
19. The Council requested updated medical information and issued a formal S184 decision letter accepting the relief duty. It explained that although it had issued a ‘not in priority need’ decision, the Council would continue to try and relieve Miss X’s homelessness as part of the ongoing relief duty.
20. Once she received the decision letter, Miss X requested a review of the Council’s decision that she did not have a priority need. The Council upheld its decision.
21. Since the Council accepted the relief duty, it has completed the actions set out in Miss X’s PHP. The Council:
• made landlord enquiries to try and maintain Miss X’s tenancy.
• offered rent and deposit in advance to help Miss X secure a private sector property.
• identified a private rented sector option but Miss X said it was unaffordable.
• told Miss X she was able to continue to bid on housing register properties.
• provided an ongoing point of contact for Miss X’s enquiries.
• referred Miss X to the Citizens Advice Bureau to assist with her debt problems.
• provided Miss X with a list of hostels in the area.
22. At the time of this decision, the Council continues to owe Miss X the relief duty.

My findings

23. When the Council accepted the relief duty, it should have formally notified Miss X by letter. It did not. This was fault. The Council only issued the decision letter 6 months later when Miss X raised a complaint. This delayed Miss X’s right to review. During this period, Miss X was homeless, sofa surfing and sleeping in her car.
24. This delay caused Miss X uncertainty and avoidable distress. I do not however consider that the delay impacted on her homelessness situation because:
• The Council extended the relief duty and carried out the PHP actions.
• When it did carry out the review of its decision, it upheld the original decision that Miss X had no priority need.

Back to top

Agreed actions

25. Within 4 weeks of my decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Miss X for the delay in sending the homelessness decision letter.
2. Pay Miss X £300 for the distress and uncertainty caused by the delay to her review rights.
26. Within 8 weeks of my decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Identify why it failed to issue the correct letter in this case and take steps to ensure it issues all homelessness decision letters promptly.
27. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault with the Council for the delay in issuing Miss X with a formal relief duty decision letter. This delayed Miss X’s right to review.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman