Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application. She said the Council’s actions meant she and her family remained in unsuitable housing conditions for too long. Ms X says this negatively impacted hers and her family’s mental and physical health. The Council is at fault and has agreed to provide Ms X with an apology and a financial remedy, and to carry out service improvements.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application. She says the Council:
1. Failed to/delayed making enquiries when she approached the Council as homeless;
2. Delayed securing interim accommodation for herself and her family;
3. Failed to recognise her then current accommodation was unsuitable for her and her family, and
4. Did not give due regard to hers and her family’s Human Rights as part of her homelessness application.
2. Ms X said the Council’s actions meant she and her family remained in unsatisfactory housing conditions for too long. She said this negatively impacted hers and her family’s mental and physical health. Ms X would like the Council to acknowledge its actions and make improvements to its service.

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 evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Ms X and the Council 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

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.
9. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them and anyone who lives with them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
10. If someone contacts a council seeking accommodation or help to obtain accommodation and gives ‘reason to believe’ they ‘may be’ homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, the council has a duty to make inquiries into what, if any, further duty it owes them. The threshold for triggering the duty to make inquiries is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular department of the council. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)
11. A council must secure interim accommodation for an applicant and their household if it has reason to believe the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
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 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)

Human Rights Act 1998

13. The Human Rights Act 1998 sets out the fundamental rights and freedoms that everyone in the UK is entitled to. The Act requires all local authorities - and other bodies carrying out public functions - to respect and protect individuals’ rights.
14. The Ombudsman’s remit does not extend to making decisions on whether or not a body in jurisdiction has breached the Human Rights Act – this can only be done by the courts. But the Ombudsman can make decisions about whether or not a body in jurisdiction has had due regard to an individual’s human rights in their treatment of them, as part of our consideration of a complaint.
15. In practical terms, councils will often be able to show they are compliant with the Human Rights Act if they consider the impact their decisions will have on the individuals affected and that there is a process for decisions to be challenged by way of review or appeal.

Principles of good administrative practice

16. In 2018 the Ombudsman published a guidance document setting out the standards we expect from bodies in jurisdiction “Principles of Good Administrative Practice”. This includes:
• Stating the criteria for decision making and giving reasons for decisions
• Keeping proper and appropriate records
• Explaining clearly the rationale for decisions and recording them

Previous complaints

17. We issued a public interest report in March 2023 about a very long delay by the Council in providing suitable temporary accommodation. As part of the resolution to this complaint the Council commissioned an independent external review of the homelessness service and produced an improvement plan based on the review. This was to be overseen by the relevant scrutiny committee or cabinet member.
18. We made another decision about a similar issue in June 2024, for a period similar to that investigated as part of this complaint. The Council agreed to send a progress report regarding the improvement plan as well as evidence of ongoing oversight by the relevant scrutiny committee.

What happened

19. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
20. Ms X moved to the UK from abroad and moved into privately rented accommodation, consisting of a single room with access to a shared kitchen.
21. Some time after Ms X moved into the accommodation, Ms X’s brother’s children came from abroad to live with her. Ms X is the children’s guardian. Ms X says the children’s parents are deceased.
22. Ms X approached the Council as homeless in July 2023. She said it was not reasonable for her and the children to stay in her current accommodation because it was damp, mouldy and overcrowded. Ms X said she was now living in a single room with three children, one of whom was receiving medical treatment for suspected tuberculosis (TB). Ms X received medical advice recommending that she and the children move to alternative accommodation. This was because of the suspected case of TB and the consequent health risk to the family as a result of the overcrowded conditions.
23. Ms X says she approached the Council as homeless again in September 2023.
24. In May 2024, Ms X approached the Council as homeless again. She said she was still living in the same overcrowded accommodation with the children and that her landlord had asked her to leave. Ms X provided medical documents in support of her homelessness approach. The Council made an appointment with Ms X to carry out an assessment in two-weeks’ time.
25. The Council carried out its assessment at the end of May 2024. It acknowledged Ms X had three dependent children living with her, and acknowledged Ms X’s report of the damp, mouldy, overcrowded conditions. Ms X told the Council that other members of the household had contracted TB. The Council acknowledged that Ms X had received a Section 21 notice from her landlord but considered this may not be valid. The Council told Ms X she needed to provide supporting documents, including medical evidence and proof of her relationship to the children. The Council suggested Ms X self-source alternative accommodation while it made inquiries, as it considered her income was enough for her to leave her current accommodation.
26. Ms X provided her documentation to the Council about a week after the assessment.
27. In early July 2024, Ms X complained to the Council. She said the Council had failed to properly deal with her application when she approached as homeless in September 2023, and that the Council had failed to provide interim accommodation for her. Ms X maintained that her current accommodation was overcrowded and unsuitable; she complained the Council had not considered her right to family life under the Human Rights Act. Ms X said the Council’s failings had caused her and her family to stay in unsuitable accommodation for longer than necessary.
28. The Council provided its complaint response in late July 2024. It said it was unable to provide any information regarding what happened with Ms X’s homelessness approach in September 2023. The Council said its Housing Needs Team had experienced several changes, including staff members leaving the organisation, which had impacted its service. The Council upheld Ms X’s complaint and apologised for any frustration and upset caused.
29. Ms X escalated her complaint to stage two of the Council’s complaint process. She said the Council’s response did not fully consider or answer her complaint. Ms X said the Council failed to make inquiries when she approached as homeless and had failed to provide her with interim accommodation. Ms X also complained the Council had failed to recognise her current accommodation was unsuitable because of the overcrowding; she said the situation had placed her family under a great deal of stress.
30. The Council contacted Ms X a few days later to confirm some details about the children and about Ms X’s guardianship of them. Ms X provided some further documentation.
31. On 29 July 2024, the Council wrote to Ms X to say it had accepted the relief duty. The Council said it had assessed Ms X’s application and was satisfied she was homeless and eligible for assistance.
32. The Council carried out a suitability assessment on 12 August 2024. The assessment acknowledged the medical evidence and immigration information provided by Ms X, and recommended Ms X and her family were placed in a four-bedroom property.
33. Ms X and her family moved to a four-bedroom property on 14 August 2024.
34. The Council provided its stage two complaint response in early September 2024. It said it had experienced a high change of personnel and the original caseworker that dealt with Ms X’s case no longer worked for the department. The Council said the handover of Ms X’s case to a new caseworker did not occur as quickly as it would have liked. The Council acknowledged it did not accept the relief duty at the beginning of Ms X’s application and apologised for the delays in the process. The Council also acknowledged it failed in the first instance to secure accommodation in a timely manner, but recognised Ms X’s recent move to a different property. The Council upheld Ms X’s complaint and apologised that the service provided did not meet its usual standards.
35. Ms X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response and brought her complaint to us.

What happened next

36. The Council accepted the main housing duty for Ms X in early November 2024. Ms X remained in the same four-bedroom property.

Analysis – the Council’s records

37. As part of my enquiries, I asked the Council to provide copies of its records regarding Ms X’s homelessness approaches to it, dating back to July 2023. Although the Council has confirmed Ms X approached the Council in July 2023, it says the case officer at the time did not record any case notes. The Council therefore has no records of Ms X’s homelessness approaches for this period.
38. The Council has not retained proper and appropriate records and is therefore unable to demonstrate how or if it considered Ms X’s homelessness approaches appropriately in 2023. This is not in accordance with the principles of good administrative practice, and I have found this to be fault.

Delay in starting an assessment

39. Ms X says she asked the Council for help in 2023 because of the overcrowding situation. She says the Council told her to find privately rented accommodation herself; Ms X says she could not afford this. The Council says it has no case notes on file for Ms X’s approaches in July or September 2023.
40. The evidence shows a delay by the Council in taking a homelessness application from Ms X and in starting an assessment. This is because:
• Ms X says the Council did not complete any forms/documents when she first approached it and simply advised her to find her own accommodation. Whilst councils can suggest alternative solutions in cases of potential homelessness (where these would be suitable and acceptable to the applicant), they must not do this to avoid their legal duties, especially the duty to make inquiries into the applicant’s homelessness. The Ombudsman has criticised councils for ‘gatekeeping’ practices, for example, failing to take a homelessness application at the earliest opportunity.
• The Council has no records or notes to demonstrate what action, if any, it took when Ms X approached it in July and September 2023. Had the Council started an assessment in July and/or September 2023, on the balance of probabilities, it would have retained records of this, and of any actions it took at that time.
• The Council’s complaint response acknowledged delays in the assessment process.
41. The Council’s duties were triggered as soon as it had ‘reason to believe’ Ms X may be homeless or threatened with homelessness. This is a low threshold which was met when Ms X approached the Council in July 2023. This is because Ms X’s household circumstances were the same in July 2023 as when she approached in May 2024, namely herself and the three children sharing a single room. The Council made inquiries following Ms X’s approach in May 2024, and subsequently decided it owed a duty to her.
42. The lack of records held by the Council for Ms X’s approaches in 2023 also indicates the Council failed to consider if it was reasonable for Ms X and the children to remain in their accommodation at that time. The Council’s apparent failure to make inquiries in 2023 indicates it failed to consider whether Ms X may have been homeless as defined under S175 of the Housing Act 1996. I acknowledge the Council’s enquiry response says it did consider the suitability of the accommodation, but there is no record in its case notes or correspondence to support this. In addition, the Council’s explanation of how it considered this relates to Ms X’s later homelessness approach in May 2024.
43. Based on the evidence, I have found the Council incurred delays in assessing Ms X’s approach as homeless. This delay is fault. On the balance of probabilities, had the Council carried out its assessment of Ms X’s homelessness approach in July 2023, it is more likely than not it would have made its decision about its duty to Ms X sooner, resulting in an earlier move to alternative accommodation.

Failure to offer interim accommodation

44. The authority is under an immediate duty to secure interim accommodation for an applicant whilst it carries out an assessment if there is 'reason to believe' they may be eligible, homeless and in priority need. As previously stated, the threshold for activating this duty is low; the authority does not need to be satisfied the applicant is actually homeless before it acts.
45. Ms X approached the Council as homeless in July 2023. She approached again under the same set of circumstances in May 2024. On that occasion, the Council considered there was a ‘reason to believe’ Ms X may be eligible, homeless and in priority need. I acknowledge at that time Ms X had also received a Section 21 notice to leave the property; however, the records show the Council considered the notice to be invalid.
46. As Ms X’s circumstances in May 2024 were the same as in July 2023, on the balance of probabilities, it is more likely than not the Council had ‘reason to believe’ Ms X may be eligible, homeless and in priority need when she approached in July 2023. As a result, the Council had a duty to secure interim accommodation for Ms X at that time. The Council’s failure to do so is fault. I acknowledge that in its stage two complaint response, the Council apologised for its failure to secure accommodation in a timely manner. Whilst it is positive the Council itself identified this, an apology does not fully address the injustice identified, namely a failure to secure interim accommodation for Ms X and her family from July 2023.

The Council’s consideration of Ms X’s Human Rights

47. Ms X complained the Council did not consider her housing circumstances under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, namely, whether her housing conditions prevented her and her family from enjoying a family life and home.
48. The Council says it assessed whether Ms X’s living situation interfered with her human rights and concluded her accommodation did not constitute a violation of Article 8. The Council says the placement was necessary due to housing shortages and was not intended to be indefinite.
49. As previously stated, the Ombudsman cannot decide whether or not an organisation has breached the Human Rights Act as this can only be done by the courts. However, the Ombudsman can make decisions about whether or not a body in jurisdiction has had due regard to an individual’s human rights. This can usually be demonstrated in an organisation’s records showing how it considered the impact of their decisions on the individual affected.
50. I have seen no evidence of how the Council considered Ms X’s living situation with regard to her human rights, either as part of its homelessness inquiries or in its response to her complaint. Whilst I acknowledge the Council’s comments, I have seen no notes to demonstrate the Council’s consideration regarding this matter at the time Ms X approached as homeless. The Council has failed to demonstrate it had due regard to Ms X’s and her family’s human rights, and I have found this failure to be fault.
51. I acknowledge Ms X’s comments that the Council’s actions caused her avoidable distress and negatively impacted hers and her family’s physical and mental health. I have considered Ms X’s comments together with the evidence provided, and found the fault identified led to Ms X and her family remaining in overcrowded accommodation for a period of 12 months (July 2023 to August 2024).

Back to top

Action

52. As the Council has previously provided a progress report regarding its improvement plan (in relation to our previous decision regarding a similar complaint for a similar period), I have not requested a further update regarding the Council’s improvement plan. I have instead made alternative recommendations which the Council has agreed to undertake.
53. To address the injustice identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within one month of the final decision:
1. Provide an apology to Ms X for the fault identified. 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;
2. Make a symbolic payment to Ms X of £4,200 in recognition of her living in unsuitable accommodation. This equates to £350 per month for the 12-month period July 2023 to August 2024;
3. Provide a written briefing to officers in its homelessness team regarding the importance of retaining accurate records of the actions/decisions taken by the Council regarding homelessness applications;
4. Remind officers of the Council’s duty to make inquiries into what, if any, duties it owes someone contacting the council who gives a reason to believe they may be homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, and
5. Remind staff of the Council’s duty to secure interim accommodation for an applicant whilst it carries out an assessment if there is reason to believe they may be eligible, homeless and in priority need.
54. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

55. I have found fault by the Council causing an injustice to Ms X. The Council has agreed to take the above action, and I have therefore concluded my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman