Summary: Miss Y complained about the way the Council dealt with her homelessness and housing applications following the service of a section 21 notice by her landlord. We have found fault, causing injustice, by the Council in: failing to properly consider whether it was reasonable for Miss Y to remain in her accommodation, and its duty to provide her with interim or temporary accommodation following the issue of court action in September 2023; failing to properly consider, before June 2024, whether it should end the prevention duty and accept the relief duty; and its communication failures and failure to review her Personal Housing Plan. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice by: apologising to Miss Y; making a payment to reflect the upset caused; and service improvements.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains about the way the Council dealt with her homelessness and housing applications. She says the Council failed to:

• deal properly with her homelessness application following the expiry of the section 21 notice served by her landlord in February 2023. It did not accept the relief duty until June 2024;
• provide her with suitable interim or temporary accommodation after the expiry of the notice and issue of possession proceedings. It wrongly told her she had to stay in the accommodation until the bailiff’s eviction order;
• review and update her personal housing plan;
• take appropriate action under the prevention duty, to find her other suitable accommodation;
• properly consider making her a direct offer of social housing; and
• respond in a timely way to her contact.

2. Miss Y says the Council’s delays and failures have caused her upset, worry and uncertainty about her and her family’s housing situation, affecting her physical and mental health. She cannot get the care and support and property adaptations she needs for her physical disabilities until she is in settled accommodation. She has also incurred liability for the costs of the landlord’s court action.
3. Miss Y wants the Council to resolve her housing situation by providing her with settled accommodation, and redress for the upset and impact of its failures.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these.
5. 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)
6. 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

What I have and have not investigated

7. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
8. I have not investigated what happened before September 2023. This is because:

• Miss Y did not bring her complaint to us until November 2024. I don’t consider there are good reasons why she could not have complained to us about her concerns regarding her homelessness and housing register applications before this; and
• September 2023 is more than 12 months before November 2024, But I have exercised my discretion to investigate what happened from this date, as this is when Miss Y’s landlord issued possession proceedings and an appropriate point to begin my investigation.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Miss Y and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Miss Y 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

What should have happened

Eviction from private rented sector (PRS) accommodation

11. Where a tenant has an assured shorthold tenancy, the landlord can issue a section 21 notice (s21) asking the tenant to leave. They do not have to give reasons, but the notice needs to be in a specific form and must satisfy various conditions.
12. If the tenant does not leave the property by the expiry date in the notice, the landlord may apply to court for a possession order. The court will make an order if it is satisfied the landlord is entitled to possession of the property.
13. If the tenant does not leave the property by the date given in the possession order, the landlord can apply for a “warrant for possession”. If the court issues a warrant, it will send the tenant an eviction notice, with the date they must leave the property by. A bailiff can evict the tenant if they do not leave by that date.

Homeless law and guidance

14. 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.
15. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the Council, they have been served with a valid s21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(5)) The Councils owes the prevention duty to applicants it is satisfied are threatened with homelessness. It must take steps to help the applicant keep their home or find somewhere new to live.
16. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175) The Council owes the relief duty to applicants it is satisfied are homeless. It must then take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person.
17. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)

The Homelessness Code of Guidance

18. The Code of Guidance says councils will have to decide, in every case, at what point a private tenant served a s21 notice becomes homeless (6.31). The Code says:
• councils should not have a blanket policy about when an applicant is homeless after a s21 notice expires (6.33).
• councils must consider the following factors when they decide if it is reasonable for a private sector tenant, who has been served with a valid s21 notice, to remain in a property after the notice has expired:
1. the position of the landlord and whether the landlord intends to proceed with possession;
2. the preferences of the tenant;
3. the financial impact of court action and any build-up of rent arrears on both landlord and tenant;
4. the burden on the courts of unnecessary proceedings where there is no defence to a possession claim; and
5. the general cost to the housing authority (6.33).
• it is unlikely to be reasonable for a tenant to stay beyond the expiry of a notice if the landlord intends to recover possession and there would be no defence to an application for possession order (6.35).
• it might be reasonable for a tenant to remain after the notice expires if a council is taking steps to persuade the landlord to let the tenant stay for a “reasonable period” to give the council and tenant time to find alternative accommodation (6.35).
• it is highly unlikely to be reasonable for a tenant to continue to occupy a property beyond the date a court has ordered them to leave (6.36).
• it is not reasonable for a tenant to remain in a property until the point a court issues a warrant to enforce a possession order (6.37).

Assessments and Personal Housing Plans (PHP)

19. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness and notify the applicant of the assessment.
20. They 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 must be provided to the applicant in writing as their PHP. The Council must keep the PHP under review. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18).

The main housing duty

21. 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. It must make its decision about the main duty 56 days after accepting the relief duty. The accommodation a council provides until it can end the main duty is called temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)

Housing allocations

22. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
23. The Council’s allocations scheme has five priority bands:

• Band A+ emergency and top priority where there is life and death risk to wellbeing;
• Band A urgent and high priority. Those with a severe medical or welfare need to move. Those for whom the need is relatively moderate do not receive this priority;
• Band B standard priority
• Band C non-urgent priority, including where a homelessness duty has been accepted
• Band C - initial preference, including homeseekers with an identified housing need who qualify for statutory preference but have not lived continuously in the borough for the last five years.

24. Only those whom the Council has assessed as being in one of these bands are eligible to join the housing register.
25. The service manager has a discretion to increase the band of households whose circumstances are deemed to be so exceptional as to warrant a higher priority band than they would normally attract under the scheme.
26. The scheme says in certain limited circumstances the Council will use its discretion to allocate properties directly.

What happened

27. I have set out a summary of the key events below. It is not meant to show everything that happened. It is based on my review of all the evidence provided about this complaint.
28. Although I am not investigating what happened before September 2023, I have set out background events as context for my decision.

Background

29. Miss Y lived in private rented accommodation with her family.
30. In February 2023 her landlord served a s21 notice requiring her to move out of the accommodation by 30 April 2023.

February 2023: Miss Y’s homelessness application

31. Miss Y made a homelessness application to the Council on 20 February, following the service of the s21 notice. She told it she was not currently working due to ill-health.
32. The Council accepted the prevention duty. It confirmed this by letter to Miss Y on 28 February. It also sent her PHP and told her about her right to request a review of the steps set out in the Plan.

March 2023: Miss Y’s housing register application

33. Miss Y also applied to join the Council’s housing register.
34. The Council accepted the application and placed her on its register in Band C with a priority date of 28 February, the date it accepted the prevention duty. It also noted she had medical conditions which would need to be considered.

April to June 2023: Council’s contact with Miss Y and her landlord

35. Miss Y asked the Council for an update about her homeless application, as the date to move out was coming up (30 April). The Council said it had previously explained the three stages of eviction to her. If she had nowhere to move to on the 30th, she had the right to stay in the property until the landlord obtained a possession order, and bailiffs were instructed.
36. The Council contacted Miss Y’s landlord about the possibility of a new tenancy agreement. There were discussions with the landlord and Miss Y, but the Council was unable to reach any agreement with the landlord about this.

September to December 2023: Landlord’s court action

37. Miss Y’s landlord had served her with a second s21 notice on 3 June requiring her to move out on 3 August.
38. In September she told the Council the landlord had now issued possession proceedings. She completed a defence to the court action with the homelessness team’s assistance.
39. The Council checked with Miss Y whether she had heard anything further from the court. She told it, on 27 October, a possession hearing had been fixed for 19 December 2023. She asked the homelessness team what would happen. Miss Y said she was extremely anxious because, now there was a court date, it was inevitable she would have to move out. She also asked for an update about the medical evidence she had recently provided.
40. The Council told Miss Y, on 31 October, this was just a hearing date, the court might decide to throw out the case, so moving was not inevitable yet. It also said it had not heard back from the medical adviser.
41. The homelessness team sent Miss Y’s medical information to the medical adviser on 31 October. It told the adviser Miss Y had dependent children and asked what her position would be if she were a homeless single person. The medical adviser replied with an assessment of Miss Y’s accommodation needs, which included ground floor or lifted accommodation.
42. Miss Y contacted the homelessness team again on 9 November. She asked whether there was any progress with the medical assessment. She said she was struggling to cope not knowing what would happen.
43. The Council told her it had received an initial assessment but would send the more recent information she had provided for a new medical assessment.
44. It also said she had a good chance of the possession action being thrown out or adjourned at the hearing. But she should be looking for alternative private rented accommodation and it could help with a deposit and advance rent.
45. Miss Y told the Council she had never stopped looking for alternative private accommodation. But she was worried about potential debt and rent arrears. Her position had changed now she was not working because of her health issues.
46. The homelessness team sent the new information to the medical adviser. They advised there was no change to their opinion about Miss Y’s housing needs.
47. The homelessness team told Miss Y she had not been awarded any extra points from the medical assessment, but she should continue to provide any new medical information.
48. It also told her it had no suitable affordable properties to offer her at the moment. She should continue to look for new accommodation.
49. On 19 December, Miss Y told the Council the court had now made a possession order.

November 2023 to January 2024: re-assessment of Miss Y’s priority band

50. On 20 November and 5 December Miss Y sent new medical information to the housing register team. She said it was unfair she had not been placed in a priority band because she had not yet lived in the borough for five years. She also said it was now crucial, following the possession order and given the impact on her health, that permanent accommodation be secured for her.
51. In its reply of 10 January to contact from Miss Y’s MP, the Council said Miss Y was currently in Band C but her banding would change once she had been living in the borough for five years.
52. On 24 January the housing register team decided to waive the residency requirement because Miss Y had now lived in the borough for nearly five years. It re-assessed her priority as Band A effective from 1 November 2023.
53. It confirmed this decision in writing to Miss Y on 30 January, together with her right to request a review of the decision.

January 2024: offer of emergency accommodation

54. The possession order made in December 2023 required Miss Y to leave her accommodation by 30 January 2024. The Council had not yet ended the prevention duty to Miss Y.
55. On 10 January the homelessness team told Miss Y it had not found any alternative suitable private rented property in her current location. It said it would notify the accommodation team she might need emergency accommodation on 30 January.
56. On 30 January the homelessness team requested emergency accommodation for Miss Y and her family. It confirmed it had reason to believe she may be homeless/threatened with homelessness and in priority need.
57. The Council offered Miss Y emergency accommodation on 30 January. Its records say she declined this on health grounds and because it wasn’t a three bedroom property.

February to June 2024: progress of Miss Y’s homelessness application

58. I haven’t seen any evidence of what happened between February to April 2024.
59. In May 2024 Miss Y told the homelessness team the landlord was applying to enforce the possession order by bailiff’s eviction.
60. The homelessness team nominated Miss Y for two private rented properties. Miss Y attended viewings but did not receive an offer.
61. The Council ended the prevention duty and accepted it owed Miss Y the relief duty on 11 June.

June 2024: Miss Y’s complaint

62. Miss Y complained to the Council about the time it had taken to end the prevention duty and accept the relief duty. She said the Council had owed the prevention duty for more than 56 days and this had delayed her housing register application.
63. In its response, the Council said:
1. there was no legal requirement to end the prevention duty after 56 days;

• the Code of Guidance suggests, where prevention work is ongoing and might be successful, it is in the interest of both the applicant and the council to continue to explore this; and
• the homelessness team discussed a new tenancy for Miss Y with her landlord so that she could remain in the property. Negotiations continued for some time. but agreement could not be reached. The team helped with her search for new private rented accommodation. It put her forward for suitable properties available with the landlords it works with, but she did not receive any offers.
2. it had now accepted the relief duty. This would continue for 56 days and at the end of this period it would decide whether it owed her the main housing duty. It was likely it would accept this duty.
3. as she was facing eviction, its emergency accommodation team would contact her, and:
• the Code advised councils should not consider it reasonable for applicants to remain in occupation up until the point a bailiff’s warrant is issued to enforce a possession order;
• it was not Council policy to wait for the issue of a bailiff’s warrant before providing emergency accommodation or instruct an applicant to stay in their property until then. The decision to remain in occupation lay with the tenant;
• it had made an offer of interim accommodation to Miss Y, on 30th January 2024, which she declined.
4. it had already placed her housing register application in Band A as from November 2023 and the date on which it accepted the relief and main housing duties had no impact on this. As previously advised, the current waiting time for a three-bedroom property was six years; and
5. it accepted it had failed to properly review her PHP between July 2023 and June 2024. It apologised for this failure.

July to August 2024: contact about the main duty and accommodation

64. The Council’s emergency accommodation team contacted Miss Y about interim accommodation on 22 July. She told it she did not need this yet as she was still waiting for an eviction date.
65. The Council accepted it owed Miss Y the main housing duty on 16 August. It confirmed it had a duty to provide her with suitable temporary accommodation until the main duty ended.
66. On 21 August the Council sent Miss Y a questionnaire as part of its suitability checks for accommodation. It told her, due to the severe shortage, it couldn’t say when it could offer her permanent social housing.

September 2024: Miss Y’s further complaint to the Council

67. Miss Y made a further complaint to the Council. She said:

• the only action taken under the prevention duty was a nomination for three private rented properties and one viewing, none of which were offered to her, nor was she advised about the outcome;
• it had told her to stay in her current accommodation until the bailiff’s eviction date. She had not been advised about the costs implications; and
• it should increase her priority banding from A to A+ or make her a direct offer.

68. The Council said in response:

• it had already accepted there had been failures in the way it had dealt with her homelessness application. It apologised for these, its lack of responses and communication failures. It noted she had rejected its offer of redress of £100;
• there were no grounds for making her a direct offer. She had been making bids but had not been shortlisted because of the priority allocation system; and
• it had asked its medical adviser to re-assess the additional medical evidence she had provided.

69. Miss Y was not satisfied with this reply and brought her complaint to us in November 2024.

Events from November 2024

70. The Council’s medical adviser assessed the further medical evidence. They advised her priority should remain Band A and that Band A+ did not apply in this case.
71. The Council told Miss Y on 20 November 2024 about the outcome of the assessment and her priority would remain Band A. It notified her of her right to request a review of this decision.
72. Miss Y informed the Council on 3 January 2025, a bailiff’s warrant had been issued with an eviction date of 6 March 2025. On 6 January, it asked the accommodation team to arrange temporary accommodation for Miss Y and her family. It offered her temporary accommodation on 21 February. which she accepted.
73. The Council said, in response to our enquiries. it had increased its offer of redress for the impact of its failures with her homelessness application and communication from £100 to £150.
74. It also told us Miss Y’s mobility need has been assessed as level 3. In accordance with its allocation policy, she will be prioritised for properties that are either already suitable for her mobility needs or can be reasonably adapted to meet them.
75. But as at May 2025, there were more than 20 households with a higher level of priority or earlier priority date than Miss Y waiting for this type of property and there is limited availability. The last three-bedroom property suitable for mobility level 3 was advertised in 2022. This makes it unlikely a direct offer of this type of property to Miss Y could be made at this time.

My decision – was there fault by the Council causing injustice?

76. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the relevant available evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.

Consideration of the point at which Miss Y became homeless

77. In my view the Council failed to properly consider, from September 2023, whether it was reasonable for Miss Y to remain in her accommodation.
78. The landlord issued possession proceedings in September 2023. The Code of Guidance says it is unlikely to be reasonable for a tenant to stay beyond the expiry of a notice if the landlord intends to recover possession and there would be no defence to an application for possession order. It also sets out the factors a council should take into account when deciding if it is reasonable for a tenant to remain. But there is no record, that in September 2023, the Council:

• considered any of these factors, including Miss Y’s preferences, the financial impact of the court action and possible rent arrears; or
• made any decision as to whether it was reasonable for Miss Y to remain at the property now the landlord had issued possession proceedings.

79. This failure was fault.
80. A possession order was made on 19 December 2023 requiring Miss Y to leave the property by 30 January 2024. The Code says it is highly unlikely to be reasonable for a tenant to continue to occupy a property beyond the date a court has ordered them to leave. But there is no record the Council:

• properly reviewed Miss Y’s circumstances in December 2023; or
• made any decision as to whether it was reasonable for Miss Y to remain at the property now a possession order had been made.

81. Although it told the accommodation team on 30 January 2024 it had reason to believe Miss Y may be homeless/threatened with homelessness and in priority need, it still failed to properly consider the Code’s guidance about this and record a decision.
82. These failures were fault.
83. I also note, with concern, the advice given by the homelessness team to Miss Y that there was a good chance the possession action would be thrown out at the court hearing. I have not seen any evidence to support this advice or that the homelessness team was qualified to give this advice.
84. I have considered below the impact of the failure to properly consider and decide whether it was reasonable for Miss Y to remain at the property after the issue of the court action.

Progress of Miss Y’s homelessness application

85. The Council accepted the prevention duty in February 2023. There is no statutory time limit for ending this duty.
86. But, in my view, following the unsuccessful negotiations for a new tenancy and the issue of possession proceedings, the Council should have considered, in September 2023, whether it should now end the prevention duty and accept the relief duty. It did not do so, and this failure was fault.
87. It also failed to review the position and whether it should end the prevention duty and accept the relief duty in December 2023 when a possession order was made. This was fault.
88. I have considered the impact of these failures below.

Provision of interim and temporary accommodation

89. I have not seen evidence the Council told Miss Y she had to remain in the property until the issue of a bailiff’s warrant.
90. But, in my view, it failed to properly consider its duty to provide Miss Y with interim or temporary accommodation following the issue of court action in September 2023.
91. This failure is linked to its failure to properly consider whether it was reasonable for Miss Y to remain in the property. There is no record:
1. the Council discussed with Miss Y:

• the implications of court action and liability for costs;
• its duty to provide her with interim and accommodation and the type of accommodation currently available; and
• her preferences; or that
2. Miss Y made an informed decision to stay in the property until the issue of the bailiff’s warrant.

92. This failure to properly consider its duty to provide interim and temporary accommodation was fault.
93. I have considered the impact of this fault below.

Impact of the faults identified above

94. I have considered the impact on Miss Y of the Council’s failure to properly consider:

• whether it was reasonable for her to remain in her accommodation following the issue of court action in September 2023;
• its duty to provide her with interim or temporary accommodation following the issue of court action in September 2023; and
• whether it should now end the prevention duty and accept the relief duty, before June 2024.

95. Any delay in ending the prevention duty and accepting the relief duty did not affect the priority of Miss Y’s housing register application. She was placed in Band C when the Council accepted the prevention duty in February 2023. Her priority under the Council’s allocations scheme did not increase when it accepted the relief and then the main duty.
96. But its failure to properly consider this before June 2024 caused Miss Y worry and uncertainty about the outcome of her homelessness application.
97. I have looked at the impact on Miss Y of the Council’s failure to properly consider whether it was reasonable for her to remain in her accommodation, and its duty to provide her with interim or temporary accommodation following the issue of court action in September 2023.
98. On the basis of the information I have seen, I don’t consider I can say, but for these failures, it is more likely Miss Y would not have remained in the property until the issue of the bailiff’s warrant or that this caused any additional court costs. This is because:

• Miss Y declined an offer of interim accommodation in January 2024 - although we do not have any details about its suitability;
• the Council told Miss Y in its complaint response in June 2024 she did not have to stay in the property until the issue of the bailiff’s warrant, and it was her decision whether to remain at the property until then;
• when offered interim accommodation in July 2024, she said she did not need this until she had an eviction date; and
• Miss Y told us she did not incur the bailiffs’ costs because she moved out before the eviction date.

99. But I consider the failures caused Miss Y further worry and uncertainty about her position and the Council’s duty to provide her with emergency accommodation.

Failure to take appropriate action under the prevention duty

100. I don’t consider there is fault by the Council on this part of Miss Y’s complaint.
101. The Council was required to take steps to help Miss Y keep her home or find somewhere new to live. It had tried to help Miss Y keep her home by exploring the possibility of a new tenancy with the landlord.
102. And from September 2023, it continued to search, through the landlords and agents with whom it worked, for new affordable and suitable private rented accommodation within Miss Y’s preferred location. It seems to have met the same difficulty as Miss Y in finding any such available properties because of the shortage of private rented accommodation in her preferred area.

Failure to consider making a direct offer of social housing

103. I don’t consider there is fault on this part of Miss Y’s complaint.
104. The Council’s allocations scheme says there are very limited circumstances in which it will exercise its discretion to make an applicant a direct offer. And it has explained why, in Miss Y’s case, it is unable to do so at this time.

Failure to review Miss Y’s PHP and communication failures

105. The Council has accepted it failed to properly keep Miss Y’s PHP under review and respond to her contact in a timely way.
106. I have also noted:

• the homelessness team did not explain to Miss Y its requests for an assessment of her medical information related only to her housing needs for interim and temporary accommodation, and not her priority band on the housing register; and
• it was, in my view, misleading to tell her, in November 2023, she had not been awarded any extra points following the recent assessment when this was not what the medical adviser had been asked to assess.

107. These failures were fault which caused Miss Y additional worry, upset and uncertainty at an already difficult time.
108. The Council offered Miss Y £150 as redress for its PHP review and communication failures. But I don’t consider this meets our expectations as it does not take into account the impact of the other faults identified in this decision.

Back to top

Action

109. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults and, within four weeks from the date of our final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. apologise to Miss Y for its: failure to properly consider whether it was reasonable for her to remain in her accommodation, and its duty to provide her with interim or temporary accommodation following the issue of court action in September 2023; failure to properly consider, before June 2024, whether it should now end the prevention duty and accept the relief duty; its communication failures; and failure to review the PHP. This apology should be in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology ; and
2. pay Miss Y £500 to reflect the upset, worry and uncertainty caused by its failures. This is a symbolic amount based on our guidance on remedies
110. And within two months from the date of our final decision the Council has agreed to:
1. review its guidance to relevant teams and officers about the process they should follow when considering and deciding, in accordance with the Code of Guidance, at what point a private tenant served a s21 notice becomes homeless. This review should include guidance about:

• recording these decisions and any election by the tenant to remain in the property; and
• the impact of these decisions on the ending of the prevention duty, acceptance of the relief duty and duty to provide interim and temporary accommodation.
2. ensure all relevant teams and officers understand the guidance; and
3. review its guidance about the duty to keep PHPs under review and the Council’s process for this and ensure the relevant teams and officers understand what they are expected to do.

111. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

112. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take the above action to remedy this injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman