Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council dealt with his homelessness. The Council was at fault for delays in reaching decisions on Mr X’s application and for not offering interim accommodation. It has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X to acknowledge the extra time he spent in unsuitable accommodation. It has also agreed to provide training or guidance for staff.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the way the Council dealt with his homeless. In particular, he complained it delayed accepting him as homeless and failed to offer him interim accommodation. This caused him distress and frustration and meant he was in unsuitable accommodation for much longer than he should have been.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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

4. I considered evidence provided by Mr X’s representative and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Mr X’s representative and the Council have had an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

6. 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.
7. If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must make inquiries into what, if any, duty it owes.
8. If a council is satisfied an applicant is threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, it must take steps to help the applicant keep their home or find somewhere new to live. This is called the prevention duty. In deciding what steps to take, a council must have regard to its assessment of the applicant’s case. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
9. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan (PHP). (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)
10. If a council is satisfied an applicant is eligible for assistance and homeless then the council will owe the relief duty. This requires the council to take reasonable steps to help them to secure suitable accommodation. The relief duty usually lasts for 56 days. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
11. If the council has reason to believe the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance, and in priority need, it has an immediate duty under section 188 of the Housing Act 1996 to provide interim accommodation, whilst it makes its enquiries. Examples of those in priority need includes those who are pregnant, have a dependent child or are vulnerable due to serious health problems, disability or old age.
12. 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 for them. 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)

What happened

13. In September 2023 Mr X completed an application to join the Council’s housing register. He said he lived above a licensed premises which played loud music and other tenants took drugs and made noise. Mr X explained he had essential tremors which affected his life and other medical conditions. The Council wrote to Mr X in mid-October. It did not award Mr X any medical priority. It said the anti-social behaviour issues needed to be addressed through the appropriate channels and he had access to the expected facilities.
14. The Council asked Mr X if he would consider sheltered accommodation as it was his only option on the housing register. Mr X met with an officer to discuss his application. Mr X agreed to be considered for, and was approved for, sheltered accommodation. The officer set up auto-bidding. This means the Council’s system would automatically register Mr X’s interest in sheltered properties each week.
15. It placed Mr X in band C for elderly/sheltered properties with effect from September 2023. The letter provided information on who to contact if the applicant was homeless or threatened with homelessness.
16. In April 2024 the Council successfully placed an automatic bid for a one bedroom sheltered accommodation property for Mr X.
17. Mr X’s representative contacted the Council to say he wanted to opt out of auto bidding and asked that it withdraw the offered accommodation due to insufficient space. They asked under what duty the Council had offered Mr X the accommodation. The Council explained it was through the allocations scheme and it agreed to remove auto-bidding.
18. Mr X’s representative told the Council Mr X’s landlord was looking to evict him and the property was unsuitable for him due to his medical conditions. They also said Mr X had a carer who supported him daily. They said in the circumstances Mr X should be considered homeless and provided with emergency accommodation.
19. The Council’s housing solutions team contacted Mr X in May 2024 and arranged an appointment for a housing assessment for early July. They advised Mr X to continue to bid on the housing register and to consider private rented accommodation in the meantime.
20. Mr X’s representative contacted the Council mid-May. They submitted a section 21 notice (a notice from the landlord which starts the legal process to end a tenancy) and Mr X’s medical information and requested emergency accommodation for Mr X. The Council responded and requested some documents. It also explained why it considered the s21 notice was not valid.
21. Mr X’s representative responded that they still considered the property was unsuitable due to Mr X’ health conditions and said they were awaiting an occupational therapist’s report on the property. They complained to the Council about the lack of support provided to Mr X with his housing situation.
22. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint in mid-June 2024. It explained why the s21 notice was not valid. It said it had assessed Mr X’s application in May 2024 and decided it had reason to believe Mr X was threatened with homelessness because his accommodation was unreasonable to occupy so had made an appointment to make further enquiries. It set out, with reference to case law, why it did not consider it was unreasonable for Mr X to remain where he was in the short term. It asked the representative to provide any further information for it to consider.
23. In early July 2024 the Council’s records show it carried out an assessment and then wrote Mr X a letter setting out it owed him the prevention duty. It said this letter was available through its housing portal. The letter stated Mr X had been served a s21 notice as the landlord wanted to re-let the property and Mr X said he needed support of a carer which could not be accommodated in his current property. Mr X’s representative says they were not aware of this letter. The Council also sent Mr X, by email, a copy of his personalised housing plan which he signed and returned, which included support with finding private rented accommodation and for Mr X to negotiate with his landlord.
24. In mid-July the representative sent the Council, by email, an OT assessment conducted by social services of Mr X’s property. They said if they did not receive a response they wanted to progress the complaint further. They followed this up later that month, chasing a response.
25. In August 2024 the records show the Council reviewed Mr X’s PHP.
26. In October 2024 the Council showed Mr X a one-bedroom property and a studio flat but he declined them as he wanted an extra bedroom. Mr X’s housing solutions officer told Mr X he was not eligible for two-bedroom properties.
27. The Council then responded to Mr X’s complaint at the second stage of its complaints’ procedure in October 2024. It said the representative considered Mr X’s property was not reasonable to occupy whilst the Council had taken the view Mr X was not owed a housing duty. It said the representative had provided details of Mr X’s medical conditions and since the stage one response had involved Adult Social Care who carried out an occupational therapy (OT) assessment. It said the OT report “was well balanced and objective. It provides a picture of someone coping well in less-than-ideal accommodation. However, the report also makes it clear that [Mr X’s] essential needs are being met’. The Council considered the property did not meet all his needs but remained reasonable for Mr X to occupy.
28. In early December 2024 Mr X’s housing solutions officer sent his medical information and the OT report to the Council’s medical officer for assessment. The medical officer advised the housing solutions officer Mr X’s property was not suitable for his medical needs.
29. The Council wrote to Mr X in mid-December 2024 to advise it accepted it owed him the relief duty. The letter said the Council had reason to believe Mr X was homeless and eligible for assistance. It went on to say ‘we have reason to believe you may have a priority need for assistance. Whilst the relief duty is owed and the Council considers that you may have a priority need for assistance the Council will have a duty to provide you with interim accommodation’. It said it would provide Mr X with details of the accommodation the Council considered to be suitable for him to occupy during the relief duty period. Mr X’s representative contacted the Council in February and March 2025 to chase up an offer of interim accommodation.
30. In mid-March 2025 the Council accepted it owed Mr X the main housing duty. The letter set out that the Council was ‘satisfied that your current accommodation remains reasonable to occupy in the short term (only) while we identify a suitable offer. Shortly after, the Council offered him permanent social housing in sheltered accommodation which Mr X has accepted.

Findings

31. When Mr X first approached the Council as homeless, it made some inquiries into his homelessness. This was appropriate. In July 2024, the Council decided it owed him the prevention duty as it considered Mr X was threatened with homelessness, and it worked with Mr X to produce a PHP. The Council was not at fault.
32. There is no evidence the Council wrote to Mr X to end the prevention duty after 56 days, around early September 2024. This was fault. Although the Council has discretion to continue the duty if the person remains threatened if with homelessness, there is no evidence of how or if the Council considered this duty should continue or end.
33. The Council responded at the second stage of its complaints procedure in October 2024. The letter stated the Council’s did not owe Mr X a housing duty. The complaint response suggested the Council had ended its housing duty but I have seen no evidence it wrote to Mr X formally setting this out. This was fault which caused Mr X confusion and denied Mr X a right of appeal.
34. Mr X’s representative sent the Council an OT report in July 2024. At this point the Council should have considered whether the property remained reasonable for him to continue to occupy. The Council did not pass this and Mr X’s medical information to its medical officer for consideration until December 2024. This delay was fault. The medical officer’s recommendation was that the property was unsuitable. Following this the Council issued Mr X with a letter setting out that it owed the relief duty. Had the Council referred Mr X to the medical officer sooner, on balance, it would have accepted the relief duty at that time, nearly four months sooner than it did.
35. When the Council accepted it owed Mr X the relief duty in mid-December 2024, it failed to offer him interim accommodation in line with the relief duty letter. There is no evidence it assessed and considered whether Mr X’s property was suitable in the short term. Given it accepted the relief duty as it considered the property unsuitable based on Mr X’s medical conditions, the Council should have offered Mr X interim accommodation. Its failure to do so was fault.
36. The relief duty should have ended after 56 days, that is in mid-February but the Council failed to issue Mr X with a main duty decision until mid-March 2025. This delay was fault.
37. The delay in accepting the relief duty and in making a main duty decision meant Mr X was in unsuitable accommodation for around six months longer than he should have been. This also caused Mr X distress and frustration.

Back to top

Agreed Action

38. Within one month of my final decision the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him £900 to acknowledge the delay in providing him with suitable accommodation and £200 to acknowledge the confusion and delayed appeal rights caused by the Council’s complaint response.
39. Within two months of the final decision the Council has agreed to:
1. provide guidance to relevant officers to ensure they decide whether to end the prevention duty after 56 days, and if so issue a formal decision with review rights;
2. provide guidance to relevant officers to ensure they notify applicants if they decide the applicant is not homeless and set out their rights of review and appeal; and
3. ensure referrals to the medical officer are made promptly on receipt of additional information which may affect an applicant’s homelessness status and priority need.
40. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

41. I have completed my investigation. The Council was at fault causing injustice which it has agreed to remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman