Summary: We have found the Council at fault for failing to secure interim accommodation for Miss X when it had reason to believe that she was eligible, homeless and in priority need. This left Miss X without suitable accommodation for the period until the Council reached its decision that she had no priority need. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy Miss X’s injustice.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about how the Council handled her homelessness application. She said the Council did not help prevent her homelessness when she said she was going to be evicted and did not offer her interim accommodation forcing her to sleep rough.

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(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. 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 and guidance

Assessments and Personal Housing Plans

6. 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)

Duty to arrange interim accommodation (section 188)

7. 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)
8. A person may have a priority need if they are:
• pregnant or have dependent children;
• a victim of domestic abuse;
• aged 16 or 17;
• former care leavers aged 18 to 20; or,
• vulnerable, for example, for medical reasons.

Review rights

9. 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.

Decision letters

10. 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)

Council complaints procedure

11. The Council’s complaints policy states that complaints should be made within 6 months of the concern so that it can investigate fully and fairly.
12. It goes on to state that if there are exceptional circumstances as to why a person could not complain within 6 months, the Council can use its discretion to consider a late complaint.

What happened

13. In October 2023, Miss X presented to the Council as homeless. It offered her emergency accommodation for the first night which she refused. The Council assessed Miss X and said it had no reason to believe that she was in priority need and therefore she did not qualify for interim accommodation. The Council said it advised Miss X how to access private rented access funding and how to join the housing register.
14. Miss X told the Council she was sleeping in a park. The Council referred her to the rough sleeping team. Miss X’s mother asked the Council to help her vulnerable daughter as she was unable to accommodate her. The Council requested information from Miss X’s GP.
15. The Council located Miss X in a park but due to her appearance and lack of equipment, officers did not believe she was sleeping rough.
16. Miss X confirmed she had slept at a friend’s house the night before the officers found her. She said she would be homeless going forward. The Council explained that without medical evidence, she still did not qualify for interim accommodation.
17. A week later, the Council located Miss X in a tent in a park. However, officers believed this was staged. The Council said this was based on the experience of officers and lack of notifications from partner agencies.
18. The Council accepted the relief duty on the basis that it was not possible for Miss X to stay with her mother on a long-term basis. The Council re-confirmed she had no priority need and was not eligible for interim accommodation. The Council advised her how to access private rented shared accommodation and said it would support her with an interest free loan.
19. A few days later, Miss X asked the Council for more information about private renting and the financial assistance available. The Council said Miss X was unhappy that she would have to repay the loan and believed she was eligible for self-contained accommodation.
20. The Council re-visited the park and other places popular with rough sleepers but saw no sign of Miss X.
21. In January 2024, the Council reached a no priority decision and closed Miss X’s housing register application as Miss X had not provided the required documents.
22. In October 2024, Miss X complained to the Council about its handling of her homelessness application. The Council rejected Miss X’s complaint on the basis that more than 6 months had passed since the incident.

My findings

Interim accommodation

23. The Council decided that Miss X did not have a priority need the day after she first presented as homeless and did not offer her interim accommodation. However, the Council made GP enquiries presumably to confirm whether she had medical needs that deemed her vulnerable. This shows the Council had ‘reason to believe’ that she may have a priority need.
24. Under Section 188, the Council should have secured interim accommodation for Miss X until it reached its formal decision that she had no priority need. It made this decision 9 days after she first approached the Council.
25. I have found fault with the Council for failing to secure interim accommodation under Section 188. This left Miss X without suitable accommodation for 9 days when the Council had ‘reason to believe’ that she was eligible, homeless and in priority need.
26. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and pay her £100 in recognition of the 9 nights she was without suitable accommodation. This is in line with our Guidance on Remedies (£350 per month).
27. The Council also agreed to make a distress payment. Miss X was either rough sleeping or sofa surfing when the Council was handling her application. Either of these situations would have been distressing for Miss X.

Complaint handling

28. Miss X complained to the Council 11 months after she experienced the homelessness process. The Council would not consider Miss X’s late complaint. I have seen no evidence the Council considered exercising discretion or even asked Miss X about any exceptional circumstances, although her complaint had mentioned domestic abuse and mental health problems.
29. I have found fault with the Council for fettering discretion when it rejected Miss X’s complaint. This resulted in Miss X having to escalate her complaint to the Ombudsman. The Council has agreed to make a symbolic payment in recognition of the time and trouble it took Miss X to pursue her complaint.

Back to top

Agreed action

30. Within 4 weeks of my decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Miss X for failing to secure interim accommodation when it had reason to believe she had priority need.
2. Pay Miss X £100 in recognition of the 9 nights she spent without suitable accommodation while the Council reached its decision on her priority need.
3. Pay Miss X £300 for the avoidable distress caused by the Council not securing interim accommodation.
4. Pay Miss X £100 in recognition of the time and trouble it has taken Miss X to pursue her complaint.
31. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

32. I have found fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy Miss X’s injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman