Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about homelessness temporary accommodation because Ms X took court action.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains via her legal representative that the Council left Ms X and her family in unsuitable homelessness temporary accommodation for over seven months. Ms X wants the Council to apologise, pay £5,600 to recognise the impact and pay a further £552.36 to repay storage costs Ms X incurred during that time.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. While Ms X was in the accommodation complained of, she started judicial review proceedings in the High Court. The court action included arguing the accommodation was unsuitable. The court action ended with a consent order that the Council would provide different accommodation within 28 days. Eleven days after the court sealed the consent order, the Council provided different accommodation.
6. The court action means the restriction in paragraph 2 applies. The court action included the suitability of the accommodation, so the Ombudsman cannot consider that. That is the case even though the court action and the complaint to the Ombudsman sought different remedies. The judicial review might have been able to provide an order about the accommodation but could not have provided a financial remedy. However, the court case cited in paragraph 2 means someone cannot seek some remedy through court action and another remedy from the Ombudsman. Nor can the Ombudsman consider any events related to the accommodation during the court action.
7. The court action ended when the court sealed the consent order, not when Ms X’s legal representative sought that order. After the court sealed the order, there were 11 days before the Council moved the family. However, we will not consider whether the Council was at fault for not moving the family sooner during those 11 days. That point is too closely connected to the matters the court action covered for us to separate it. Anyway, it would be a disproportionate use of the Ombudsman’s resources to investigate 11 days of the over seven months the family spent in the accommodation.

Back to top

Final decision

We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. The law prevents us investigating because Ms X sought a remedy by taking court action.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman