Summary: Miss X complains the Council has not properly dealt with her homelessness resulting in her living in unsuitable housing. The Council delayed issuing its main housing duty decision. Miss X had the wrong dates recorded on the housing register for her housing priority. The Council should apologise and pay Miss X £200 for avoidable distress and uncertainty.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X, complains the Council did not deal properly with her housing because it delayed dealing with her homelessness application and has not communicated with her.
2. Miss X says she has suffered avoidable distress and uncertainty and had to live in overcrowded accommodation.

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 an injustice, 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 evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law, Guidance and Policy

Legislation and statutory guidance

8. 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 prevention duty

9. 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. In deciding what steps to take, a council must have regard to its assessment of the applicant’s case. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

The relief duty

10. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

The main housing duty

11. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to make accommodation available (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)

What happened?

12. This is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain everything I reviewed during my investigation.
13. Miss X made a homelessness application to the Council in January 2024.
14. Miss X became homeless in February 2024. Miss X was staying with family. The Council made an assessment and decided in April 2024 that it owed a relief duty. It did not provide temporary accommodation because Miss X was staying with family.
15. The Council provided Miss X with a personal housing plan and an advice pack in April 2024.
16. Miss X first complained to the Council in May 2024, that she had been homeless since February and that there had been a lack on contact from the Council. The Council said it would upgrade Miss X’s banding award from Band 3 to Band 2.
17. In June Miss X complained to the Council again that her application was still in Band 3 and was restricting her bidding for housing. The Council upheld her complaint that there had been a lack on contact and apologised. It also said it had made a priority request to change her banding which would be backdated.
18. Miss X complained to the Ombudsman in September 2024.
19. Miss X was later awarded band 1 priority, the highest possible, from November 2024, when the Council made its decision about the main housing duty.

Analysis

20. The Council accepts that it did not take the main housing duty (s193) decision within 56 days of the relief duty commencing. This is fault by the Council.
21. The Council accepts that this caused an error in the date of Miss X’s housing band. This is fault by the Council.
22. The Council has confirmed it has now backdated Miss X’s housing priority in band 1 to June 2024 when it should have made its s193 main housing duty decision.
23. The Council says there is no further injustice to Miss X because the waiting time for the type of property Miss X requires significantly exceeds the time she has been waiting, including taking the backdating of her application into account.
24. I agree with the Council. I consider the Council’s action to be an appropriate remedy. On the balance of probabilities, Miss X has not suffered any further injustice because she has not missed any housing opportunities as a result of the Council’s delay in accepting the s193 main housing duty.
25. I have seen evidence the Council has been in contact with Miss X in October 2024 regarding temporary accommodation, which Miss X declined. The Council says it has had no further contact from Miss X requesting temporary accommodation. This is not fault by the Council.
26. The Council accepted in its complaint response that there was a lack on contact from Miss X’s case officer. I agree this is fault by the Council. Miss X suffered uncertainty and avoidable distress.

Back to top

Action

27. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of this decision:
• Apologise to Miss X for the fault found in this decision We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Pay Miss X £200 in respect of uncertainty and avoidable distress.
28. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

29. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has taken actions during my investigation to remedy some injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman