Summary: Mr X complains the Council did not deal properly with nhis homelessness application, causing delay. The Council did not properly process his homelessness application in 2023, delayed dealing with his application in 2024 and delayed its complaint responses. Mr X suffered avoidable delay and distress, in addition to lost appeal rights in 2023. The Council should apologise, pay Mr X £500 for avoidable distress, pay Mr X £1,300 in respect of delays to dealing with his homelessness application and provide guidance to staff.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains the Council did not deal properly with his homelessness applications because:

• It failed to ask for supporting documentation in regard to his homelessness application in November 2023;
• It failed to keep in contact with him about, and delayed processing his homelessness application in May 2024; and
• Its complaint handling was poor.

2. Mr X says he has suffered avoidable distress and uncertainty, been deprived of decision and appeal rights in 2023, and suffered unnecessary delay in 2024.

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 Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr 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 policies

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 threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the council on or after 3 April 2018:

• they are likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• they have been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5)

10. Someone 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)

Interim and temporary accommodation

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)

The prevention duty

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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)
16. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions:

• their eligibility for assistance;
• what duty (if any) is owed to them if they are found to be homeless or threatened with homelessness.

Decision letters

17. After completing inquiries, the council must give the applicant a decision in writing. If it is an adverse decision, the letter must fully explain the reasons. All letters must include information about the right to request a review and the timescale for doing so. (Housing Act 1996, section 184, Homelessness Code of Guidance 18.30)

What happened?

18. This is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain everything I reviewed during my investigation.
19. Mr X contacted the Council in September 2023 saying he was in serious danger where he was living and asked for assistance in Lambeth as he had a family connection there.
20. The Council carried out an assessment of his case. The Council closed Mr X’s case because it said he had not sent it documents it had asked for.
21. Mr X complained to the Council in April 2024. He also approached the Council again in May 2024 asking for assistance with housing, and providing crime reference numbers relating to the danger he said he faced.
22. The Council asked Mr X for supporting documents. Mr X provided supporting documents in Mat and early June 2024.
23. The Council’s final complaint response alluded to an oversight regarding an email, not receiving a response, and some staff being unable to find Mr X ‘in the system.’ The complaint response did not clearly uphold or reject Mr X’s complaint.
24. Mr X repeatedly provided personal information to the Council in October 2024.
25. Ther Council made checks regarding Mr X’s crime reference numbers in November 2024 and asked for further information in December 2024.

Analysis

The Council’s position

26. The Council says that in relation to his 2023 application:
• It did not send a request to Mr X asking for further information.
• It intended to make enquiries about his circumstances.
27. The Council says that in relation to his 2024 application:
• It considered if Mr X was eligible for s188 temporary accommodation because there was reason to believe he was eligible.
• It made enquiries with the police and these did not show there was any risk to him in his accommodation, therefore he did not meet the threshold to be offered interim accommodation.
• It accepts there was delay in dealing with his application.
28. The Council accepts there were delays in responding to Mr X’s complaint at both stages of its complaints process and it failed to provide him with an interim response about this. I agree this is fault by the Council.

Mr X’s 2023 application

29. Mr X was denied the opportunity to provide supporting information regarding his housing application. As a direct consequence he did not receive a decision letter and was denied a right of review of a decision.
30. The Council has accepted that it considered whether Mr X was eligible for interim accommodation in 2024. Given that it intended to make enquiries about his circumstances, it should also have done so earlier in 2023 when Mr X first made contact. It has provided no evidence to show that it made any consideration about interim accommodation in 2023. Consequently, on the balance of probabilities, the Council did not consider this in 2023.
31. This is fault by the Council. Mr X had his case closed arbitrarily and suffered avoidable distress and delay because he had to remake his application 6 months later in 2024.

Mr X’s 2024 application

32. I have seen emails which shows the delay to Mr X’s application being delay with by the Council was approximately 5 months. I agree with the Council. This is fault. Mr X suffered avoidable distress and delays.
33. An email from the Council shows it made checks regarding the crime numbers provided by Mr X. Those checks were made to the metropolitan police in London, not the local force where Mr X then lived. The email shows the Council were aware that checks may need to be made with other forces. The Council has provided no evidence to show it did so.
34. The basis on which it made its decision about whether Mr X was eligible for interim accommodation was therefore flawed. It could not have made proper consideration of whether Mr X was eligible for interim accommodation. This is fault by the Council. Mr X suffered uncertainty and distress and had to continue living with a friend.

What the Council has done

35. The Council says it:
• Established that Mr X is eligible for housing assistance.
• Accepted a relief duty to Mr X.
• Apologised to Mr X for the delay in processing his 2024 homelessness application.
• Recognises that Mr X will have suffered uncertainty and distress as a result of delays and its late complaint responses.

Back to top

Action

36. 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 Mr X for the fault found. 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 Mr X £500 for avoidable distress.
• Pay Mr X £1,300 in respect of the 13 months delay to properly processing his homelessness application, at a rate of £100 per month between September 2023 and November 2024.
• Provide guidance to staff to ensure:
1. Correspondence with applicants is properly sent and recorded.
2. Homelessness applications are dealt with in a timely manner.
3. Enquiries regarding crime reference numbers are made to all relevant police forces.
4. Full and proper consideration is given to each applicant in relation to their eligibility for interim accommodation.
5. Complaint responses are sent within the relevant timescales, or interim responses are sent clearly explaining why it is not possible to reply fully in the proper timeframe.
37. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

38. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman