Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to make inquiries when Miss X gave it reason to believe she might be homeless. The Council was also at fault for telling Miss X to approach a different Council, inadequate record keeping and refusing to deal with Miss X’s complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise, investigate Miss X’s case, make a payment to her and act to improve its services.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained that the Council refused to help her when she approached for help with housing. She says the Council told her to approach a different local authority.
2. As a result, Miss X says she remains living in a property where she and her children are unsafe.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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.
5. 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

6. I considered the complaint and the information Miss X provided.
7. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
8. I referred to the Ombudsman's Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
9. Miss 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 found

What happened

10. In late 2023, Miss X moved into the Council’s area. Another council (Council B) provided Miss X with the privately rented property to end a homelessness duty it owed her.
11. In August 2024, Miss X complained to the Council. She said her child had been assaulted for wearing a religious item. She said she had poor eyesight and the location of the property was not safe for her. In reply, the Council told Ms X she needed to complain to Council B because it owed her a duty. It closed the complaint.
12. Later that month, Ms X says she spoke with an officer in the Council’s homelessness service. She says the officer told her she needed a letter from Council B confirming it did not owe her a duty before the Council could help her. The Council has no records or notes of any contact from Miss X.
13. In late August, the Council’s welfare and debt advice service emailed Ms X. It referred to a call with Miss X that day. It said it might not owe her a duty because she had recently moved into its area. It said if Council B had already told her it did not owe her a duty, Miss X should get this in writing. The Council said once Miss X had such a letter, she could ask the Council for housing advice.
14. In September, in an email to Miss X, the Council told her it had assigned her case to an officer and gave her a reference number. The Council completed a triage assessment. This said it had reason to believe Miss X might be homeless or threatened with homeless. The assessment notes say the Council told Miss X it might not be able to help her. It said it would look into her medical conditions and decide if it could help her. After the assessment, Miss X sent the Council details of the medications she took. The Council said it closed Miss X’s case in February 2025 because of “no contact” and her failure to provide required documents in support of her application.

My findings

15. Miss X approached the Council in August 2024 and provided information that gave reason to believe she might be eligible and homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Council therefore had a duty to make inquiries and decide what, if any, further duty it owed her (Housing Act 1996 s184). The Council’s failure to do so was fault. Its failure to keep proper records of Miss X’s homeless application was also fault.
16. Instead, it told Miss X to approach Council B. Council B no longer owed Miss X any homelessness duty and she had lived in the Council’s area for almost eight months. The Council should not have told Miss X to get a letter from Council B before it could help her. This amounts to gatekeeping and was fault.
17. The Council told Miss X in September that it had assigned her case to an officer and it completed a triage assessment. However, it has no records of any contact with Miss X after this. It says it closed her case because she failed to provide the required documents but there is no evidence it told Miss X what documents it needed, sought to follow up with her at any point between September 2024 and February 2025 or wrote to her to say it was closing her application. This was fault. The records demonstrate the last advice Miss X received was that the Council would decide whether it had a duty to help her and let her know. The duty to make inquiries is on the Council. Its failure to do so was fault.
18. The Council refused to investigate Miss X’s complaint and instead told her to complain to Council B. This was fault.
19. Because of these faults, Miss X experienced significant and avoidable distress and frustration. She remains living in a property where she feels unsafe without knowing if the Council has a duty to help her. This is an injustice to Miss X.

Back to top

Action

20. To remedy the injustice to Miss X from the faults I have identified, the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Miss X in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology;
2. Contact Miss X to complete an assessment of her circumstances and decide what, if any, homelessness duty it owes her; and
3. Pay Miss X £300 to recognise her avoidable distress and frustration.
21. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
22. The Council should also take the following action to improve its services:
1. Using this case as an example, provide training or guidance to relevant staff on the duty to make inquiries when an applicant gives reason to believe they might to be homeless or threatened with homelessness regardless of questions about local connection or duties owed by another council.
2. Using this case as an example, provide training or guidance to relevant staff on the minimum expectations for record keeping and communication with applicants in homeless applications.
23. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken within eight weeks of my final decision.

Back to top

Decision

24. I have completed my investigation. The Council was at fault. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman