Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to consider his medical conditions when reviewing his housing application. We find fault with the Council for failing to communicate effectively with him. We have agreed a symbolic payment for the frustration and distress caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to consider his medical conditions and supporting documents when reviewing his housing application.
2. Mr X is living in unsuitable accommodation with a family member perpetrating domestic abuse.
3. Mr X would like to bid on suitable ground floor properties.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
6. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal or a government minister or started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6), as amended)
7. 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

How I considered this complaint

8. I spoke with Mr X and considered the information he provided.
9. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
10. I considered relevant law and guidance, as set out below and our guidance on remedies, published on our website.
11. Mr 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 have and have not investigated

12. The Council ended its main housing duty because it says Mr X refused an offer of accommodation it considered was suitable. Mr X says he did not refuse the offer. This decision carried a statutory right of review and then an appeal to court. Mr X used his right of review (the review remains ongoing). Therefore, my investigation has not considered the suitability of accommodation once the Council owed the main housing duty (see paragraph six).

Back to top

What I found

Homelessness

13. 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 main housing duty

14. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)

Interim and Temporary Accommodation

15. There are two types of accommodation councils provide to certain homeless applicants: interim accommodation and temporary accommodation.
16. A council must secure accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. This is called interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
17. If a council is satisfied an applicant is unintentionally homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation. This is called the main housing duty. The accommodation a council provides until it can end this duty is called temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
18. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household.  This duty applies to interim and temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
19. In reaching a decision on suitability the Council has to consider the space and arrangement of the accommodation and the specific needs of the applicant and any household members due to a medical condition or disability.
20. The duty to provide suitable accommodation is immediate, non-deferrable, and unqualified. (Elkundi, R (On the Application Of) v Birmingham City Council [2022] EWCA Civ 601)

What happened

21. The following is a summary of the facts relevant to my consideration of the complaint. It does not include everything that happened.
22. Mr X made a homeless application to the Council in May 2023. He had a telephone assessment and told the Council he was living with an abusive family member in a house that was in poor condition with significant damage.
23. The Council accepted the relief duty to Mr X in June and offered him interim accommodation but he refused as it was shared. He said sharing accommodation concerned him as he did not know how he would react to other residents due to his mental health.
24. The Council sent Mr X a letter explaining this on 29 June 2023 and said “the Council has a duty to provide you with interim temporary accommodation”. It went on to say “The Council has secured interim accommodation for your and notified you of this in a separate letter.” The Council confirmed to the Ombudsman that it should have taken this sentence out of the letter.
25. The telephone note provided by the Council is dated 14 June and refers to a conversation which took place on the 24 June. The Council said in response to our enquiries it was a typo and refers to a conversation which took place on the 24 May. As this note was not made contemporaneously it holds less weight than had it been made at the time of the conversation, however on the balance of probabilities the idea of interim accommodation was discussed.
26. The note says Mr X asked about temporary accommodation and if it will be shared. His case worker said there “was a chance it will be”. Mr X said he would worry he would “do something to other tenants” if it was shared, and he needs to have his dog with him. The case worker said as his dog is not a therapy or guide dog, there is no medical reason that explains why he needs his dog. Mr X started shouting and said he might as well stay where he is if he has to share and not take his dog. He walked away from the phone and his support worker. The Council worker told the support worker Mr X had turned down temporary accommodation, and the threats made to other tenants concerned him if Mr X has to share.
27. In response to our enquiries the Council said as a single man it would only offer him shared accommodation. It would only offer self contained accommodation to single people where medical evidence shows that a person cannot be in shared accommodation. It said Mr X refused the interim accommodation as it was shared and never asked for it again.
28. The Council accepted the main housing duty in October and was bidding on properties for Mr X on the housing register.
29. In November the housing officer visited Mr X to discuss temporary accommodation and assess his living conditions. The case notes do not say if Mr X was aware he had a review right if offered temporary accommodation.
30. In response to my enquires the Council said if Mr X accepted temporary accommodation he would have been referred to the Accommodation Team who would have then advised him of his right to review.
31. In December Mr X emailed the Council to say a family member had attacked him at home and the police had been called. The Council said it responded on 20 December saying it could arrange temporary accommodation for him, but only added this note to the journal on 6 February 2024.
32. Mr X emailed the Council in February to say he had been offered a property on the 16th floor and said this was challenging for him with his support dog, back and mobility issues and mental health needs. He said he would appeal the housing offer based on suitability and asked for details of the Council’s complaint procedure.
33. The Council logged the review request on 6 February. It sent Mr X a consent form to get his medical records and asked for a formal diagnosis of his phobia. Mr X explained he had a traumatic event in a lift when he was young and had not disclosed it as it was personal.
34. In mid-February Mr X sent the Council a letter from his GP. The letter said “he has an underlying mental health issue with fear of heights and he says he has a lift phobia from the past. He says he will not be able to access a high rise flat and we would support his request for ground floor accommodation.”
35. It is clear from the case notes that Mr X called the Council to discuss his needs regularly from February to July 2024. The Council told him the GP letter was “problematic” and a manager contacted him on 26 March to explain the letter needed to be the GP’s own opinion or diagnosis. The Council explained this in the complaint response. However Mr X was unsure about how he could prove his fear of heights.
36. In response to our enquiries the Council said the domestic abuse formed an integral part of Mr X’s assessment and was the reason it was satisfied he was in priority need and then awarded the main housing duty.
37. Mr X says the Council failed to consider his medical needs when deciding which properties to bid for. He made a complaint to the Council in July 2024, saying it accepted his GP letter over the telephone but were now discounting it.
38. The Council response said the GP letter was based on what Mr X had said rather than an assessment from his medical records. It said the Council did consider the letter but it did not provide sufficient evidence to only consider ground floor properties for him.
39. In response to our enquiries the Council said it had accepted the GP letter over the phone in May 2024 leading to him being listed for ground floor only properties. However following his stage one complaint, a more senior officer reviewed the letter and said it was not sufficient.
40. Mr X was unhappy with the response and raised a stage two complaint. The Council response upheld the stage one response, saying its investigation was thorough and had already addressed his concerns.
41. Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman.
42. During my enquiries I requested all letters for any offers given to Mr X.
43. In October the Council offered Mr X a property. Mr X said he accepted but the Council have said he refused it and ended its main housing duty. I cannot investigate this as Mr X has a review right (see paragraphs six and twelve) which he is using.

Analysis

44. The Council had reason to believe Mr X was eligible, homeless and in priority need because of domestic abuse in May 2023. It therefore had a duty to offer him interim accommodation.
45. In response to the draft decision the Council said a discussion about interim accommodation took place on 24 May (see paragraph 25). The Council say Mr X did not want interim accommodation. This is not correct. Mr X said if it was shared accommodation he couldn’t take it.
46. Mr X raised concerns about having to share accommodation due to his mental health (see paragraph 26). People may well get upset or irate at the thought of having to leave their pet when entering interim accommodation, and the Council made no enquiry into Mr X’s mental health when he said he could not share accommodation for mental health reasons.
47. The Council missed opportunities to assess that Mr X understood interim accommodation was available to him and understand why he did not want to have it, until a conversation with him in December 2024. If a Council has contact details we would expect it to follow up with the customer as it is an emotive subject and can be confusing.
48. The letter sent to Mr X in June (see paragraph 24) does say it has a duty to provide interim accommodation but is not clear that Mr X has to get in touch with the Council if he would like this to be arranged. The Council could make this clearer to avoid frustration and confusion.
49. The letter refers to “interim temporary accommodation” where it should say interim accommodation. This is fault by the Council as the terms interim and temporary accommodation are governed by different parts of legislation and not referring to the correct terms can lead to confusion.
50. The Council also said in the letter it had found interim accommodation for Mr X which it later says was an error.
51. The Council accepted the main housing duty in October. During my enquiries it provided the letter that said “if you require temporary accommodation please contact me”.
52. There was confusion whether the letter from Mr X’s GP was sufficient evidence. He was told it was not suitable in March 2024, then it was sufficient in May, then not sufficient again in July. This caused Mr X confusion and distress. I have recommended a service improvement to ensure the Council have a clear system in place so staff are clear in advising applicants.
53. The Council staff have not made contemporaneous notes which have been confusing, and the notes contained incorrect dates (see paragraphs 25 and 31). I have recommended a service improvement to ensure where possible, staff make contemporaneous notes to avoid confusion in the future.

Back to top

Agreed action

54. Within one month of the final decision, the council should:
• Apologise to Mr X, in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology;
• Pay Mr X £200 in recognition of the frustration, distress and uncertainty caused by the faults identified above.
55. Within three months of the final decision the Council should:
• Remind relevant officers to make contemporaneous notes especially relating to telephone calls or meetings with applicants;
• Remind relevant officers to be clear as to what evidence is needed from people using its service; and
• Make the decision letters clearer when referring to interim or temporary accommodation.
56. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

57. I find the Council at fault for poor communication with Mr X. We have agreed a symbolic payment for the distress and uncertainty caused.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman