Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to support her when she became homeless because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to assist her when she became homeless. In particular, she said it:
• kept her and her children homeless, but rehoused her former partner;
• made referrals to children’s services;
• failed to return calls for over a year; and shouted at her in June 2024.
2. Ms X said these failings caused her stress and worry, which aggravated an underlying medical condition, and meant she could not sleep.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
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 investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. We usually expect people to complain to us within 12 months of the events complained about. Ms X complained to us in June 2024 about events from March 2023. There is good reason to exercise discretion on time because Ms X was facing homelessness and the matters complained about include a period falling within 12 months.

What happened

10. When Ms X initially contacted the Council in March 2023, it offered her interim accommodation, but she refused this because she said she would prefer to remain with her former husband in overcrowded accommodation until settled accommodation was identified. The Council made a further offer of interim accommodation in May 2023, which was also refused.
11. The Council had to make enquiries to another council, Council B, which already had an open homelessness application for Ms X. When Council B confirmed it had ended its homelessness duty, this Council accepted a relief duty and issued a personalised housing plan.
12. The Council referred Ms X for two privately rented properties, but unfortunately these were later found to be unaffordable due to Ms X’s outstanding debts. The Council suggested she get debt advice to address that.
13. In May 2023, the Council decided Ms X was intentionally homeless. It explained she could ask for a review of that decision within 21 days if she was unhappy with it. She did not do so.
14. In its complaint response, the Council said it could not comment on her former husband’s case for data protection reasons. It said it needed more information about her complaint an offer shouted at her before it could investigate that.

My assessment

15. The Council has taken the steps we would expect to support Ms X when she became homeless. It made referrals to children’s social care, which it has a duty to do where a child is at risk of becoming homeless. We will not investigate her complaint of a lack of support further because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.
16. We will not investigate her complaint about the Council rehousing her husband because any actions in relation to him did not cause her a significant injustice.
17. We will not investigate her complaint about the Council not returning her calls or the officer shouting at her because there is insufficient injustice to justify us doing so. In any case, the Council has apologised for not returning her calls, which was an appropriate remedy for any injustice caused.
18. We will not investigate any complaint about the Council’s decision she was intentionally homeless because Ms X had rights of review and appeal and it was reasonable for her to exercise these.

Back to top

Final decision

19. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman