Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on a homelessness application. It was reasonable for Miss X to ask the Council for a statutory review of the decision and to appeal further to the County Court if unsuccessful.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council evicting her from temporary accommodation after it decided that she is non-priority homeless. She says she has nowhere to live and that her recent request for a review of the decision was rejected.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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:
• it was reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X says the Council has decided that she is non-priority homeless after she was placed in temporary accommodation under the homelessness relief duty. It told her that she does not fall into any categories which would identify her as being vulnerable following consideration of any medical needs she has.
6. The Council gave Miss X the decision that she was non- priority in Match 2024 and it evicted her from the accommodation in August. The decision letter advised Miss X about her rights to a statutory review under s.202 of the Housing Act 1996 and how to seek advice on this. She did not ask for a review until August which is outside the 21-day period for a review request.
7. It was reasonable for Miss to ask for a review within 21 days and the Council advised her about the time limit in March. We will not investigate this complaint now because had she asked for a review in time she could also have used a further right of appeal to the courts if it had been unsuccessful.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on a homelessness application. It was reasonable for Miss X to ask the Council for a statutory review of the decision and to appeal further to the County Court if unsuccessful.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman