Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a homelessness application. The complaint is late without good enough reason to investigate it now. It is also unlikely investigation would find enough evidence of fault by the Council with the application. It would be disproportionate to investigate the Council’s complaint-handling by itself.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council did not deal with a homelessness application or with her formal complaint. She says she has therefore continued living in unsuitable housing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. 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)
3. 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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and copy correspondence from the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X complains the Council did not act on a homelessness application she made 23 months before her complaint to us. Ms X complained to the Council about the lack of a response 11 months after making her application. A year after her complaint to the Council, Ms X complained to us that she had not received a substantive response to her complaint or to the application.
7. It is reasonable to expect to hear promptly from a Council about a potentially urgent matter such as a homelessness application. Ms X knew two years ago she had not heard from the Council about her application. So the restriction in paragraph 2 applies. I note Ms X has physical and mental health problems and has received help to complain. I appreciate that might mean it would take Ms X longer to come to us than someone unaffected by such circumstances. However, there was about a year before the complaint to the Council and around the same period again before the complaint to us. Overall, I consider Ms X could have complained to us considerably sooner. There is not good enough reason to accept the complaint late.
8. Even if there was good reason to accept the complaint late, I would still not be persuaded to investigate it. The Council states it has now established Ms X did not make a homelessness application; rather, she made the first of two parts of an application to the social housing register but, as the second part of that application was not submitted, the application lapsed and the Council took no action. In the circumstances, there is unlikely to be fault in the Council not having acted on a partial social housing application. Therefore it is unlikely we would fault the Council for not realising the partial social housing application was actually intended to be a homelessness application. So it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council on the underlying substantive point of not acting on Ms C’s potential homelessness.
9. Ms X also complains about the Council’s handling of her formal complaint about the allegedly lost application. I note the Council has apologised for some fault here. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.
10. I understand the Council started dealing with a homelessness application after Ms X’s complaint to us. That is a new matter. If Ms X were to be dissatisfied with the Council’s recent actions, she should complete the Council’s complaint procedure before complaining to us about such matters.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint as is late without good enough reason to investigate it now. It is also unlikely any investigation now would find enough evidence of fault by the Council with the application. It would be disproportionate to investigate the Council’s complaint-handling in isolation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman