Summary: Ms X complained that the Council delayed in processing her Section 202 review request about the suitability of the temporary accommodation offered to her. Ms X says this caused her distress. Based on current evidence we have found fault in the Council’s actions but do not recommend a remedy.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained that the Council delayed in processing her Section 202 review request about the suitability of the temporary accommodation offered to her.
2. Ms X says this caused her distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Ms X and the Council were invited to comment on my draft decision. I have considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance says, rather than advise the applicant to return when homelessness is more imminent, the housing authority may wish to accept a prevention duty and begin to take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. 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. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)

Review rights

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

• the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation offered under section 200(3) and section 193). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.

Review procedure

9. The review must be carried out by someone who was not involved in the original decision and who is more senior to the original decision maker. The reviewing officer needs to consider any information relevant to the period before the decision was made (even if only obtained afterwards) as well as any new relevant information the council has obtained since the decision. (The Homelessness (Review Procedure etc.) Regulations 2018, Homelessness Code of Guidance Chapter 19)
10. Councils must complete reviews of the following decisions within eight weeks of the date of the review request:

• eligibility for assistance;
• not in priority need;
• intentionally homeless;
• suitability of accommodation;
• notice being given of deliberate and unreasonable refusal to cooperate and the effect of the notice is to bring the relief duty to an end.

11. These periods can be extended if the applicant agrees in writing.
12. The council must advise applicants of their right to appeal to the county court on a point of law, and of the period in which to appeal. Applicants can also appeal if the council takes more than the prescribed time to complete the review. (Housing Act 1996, sections 202, 203 and 204)

What happened

13. The Council accepted the relief duty for Ms X in May 2024 and offered Ms X alternative temporary accommodation in early September 2024.
14. Ms X asked for a section 202 review of the suitability of the accommodation the Council offered in early September 2024. Ms X said the property had mould and damp and had damaged windows. Ms X also said the accommodation was not as advertised in terms of its location within the building.
15. The Council emailed Ms X in early September 2024 to say she would need to ask for a section 202 review of the suitability of the accommodation offered to her. Ms X replied to the Council to say she had done this. The Council replied the same day to acknowledge the section 202 review request from Ms X.
16. The Council contacted Ms X in mid- September 2024 to discuss the issues with the accommodation it had offered to her. The Council’s email says it had tried to call Ms X previously but had not been able to reach her.
17. The Council emailed Ms X in early October 2024 to say it had been trying to contact her about the issues she reported with the accommodation it had offered to her.
18. Ms X raised a complaint in mid-October 2024 about the suitability of the accommodation the Council had offered her and the Council’s failure to complete the suitability review.
19. The Council emailed Ms X in late October 2024 to say it had been trying to contact Ms X to discuss the housing issues she had reported but had had no response. The Council said if Ms X did not respond by the end of October 2024, it would consider her review request withdrawn.
20. The Council wrote to Ms X in mid-January 2025 to say it had withdrawn her review request following no further contact from her.
21. Ms X has explained in response to the draft decision that the Council had been using the incorrect email address in its September 2024, October 2024 and January 2025 emails.

Analysis

22. Ms X asked the Council to review the suitability the temporary accommodation it offered her in September 2024.
23. The Council has repeatedly tried to contact Ms X to discuss the issues with the accommodation she raised but has not been able to contact her. I accept the Council had used the incorrect email address to contact Ms X which is fault.
24. Ms X says she could not contact anyone at the Council. However, I have seen that the Council tried to contact Ms X on various occasions and used both telephone calls and an incorrect email address.
25. While Ms X would not have received the emails sent to the incorrect address the Council used a different method of contact as well and as such there was no injustice caused to Ms X.
26. I appreciate the Council did not complete the review. However, the Council did try to do so and contacted Ms X to try to progress this.

Back to top

Decision

27. I find fault causing no injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman