Summary: Miss Y complained about the way the Council dealt with her housing register and homelessness applications. We have found fault, causing injustice by the Council, in its: delay and failures assessing Miss Y’s homelessness application and its homelessness duties; failure to provide her with suitable interim accommodation; and failure to provide clear information about its procedure for direct let offers. We have also found fault by the Council in failing to keep proper records of a prevention duty decision, which did not cause injustice. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice by: apologising to Miss Y, making a payment to reflect the upset and worry caused; and making a service improvement.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains about the way the Council dealt with her housing register and homelessness applications. She says it:
1. delayed assessing her homelessness application, and making decisions about homelessness duties;
2. failed to provide her with interim accommodation, when she was homeless and in priority need; and
3. delayed agreeing to make a direct let offer through her housing register application.
2. Miss Y says, because of the Council’s failures she:

• had to fund her own emergency accommodation at a hotel for over four months;
• had to wait longer than she should have done for an offer of suitable permanent accommodation; and
• was caused avoidable additional uncertainty, worry and upset about her situation.

3. She wants the Council to reimburse her for the cost of her hotel accommodation, which amounts to more than £12,000.

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

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Miss Y and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. 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

Homelessness law and guidance

9. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the Code) set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
10. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help them to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. This is called the prevention duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
11. 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)
12. 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)
13. If councils are satisfied applicants are homeless and eligible for assistance, they must take reasonable steps to secure accommodation. This is called the relief duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

9. If, at the end of the relief duty, a council is satisfied an applicant is 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)

10. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household.  This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main housing duty.  (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)

The Council’s housing allocations scheme

11. 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))
12. The Council’s allocations scheme:
1. is a choice-based lettings scheme;
2. categorises applicants by one of four bands to reflect their degree of housing need. Band A, the highest priority, is for applicants requiring urgent rehousing where the Council has a legal duty to consider them for accommodation.
3. has a direct let procedure. The scheme says:

• there are circumstances where a property may be allocated outside the choice-based lettings scheme.
• there are direct letting categories. These include lettings of adapted/adaptable properties. This category can be used where the applicant has been assessed as requiring major adaptations such as a stair or through floor lift or adaptation for a downstairs bathroom; and
• direct lettings will only be made to applicants assessed as eligible for a direct offer.

What happened

13. 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

Background

14. Miss Y joined the Council’s housing register, while living with family.
15. In 2023 her family told her she would have to move out of the property. A housing support organisation referred her to the Council for housing assistance.
16. The Council accepted her homelessness application. It recorded she had been told to leave the family property and was in priority need because of her health conditions.
17. A medical assessment was completed for her housing register application in December 2023. This recorded the following housing recommendation:

• single level dwelling with all facilities on the level;
• access that was either; level, ramped, passenger lift or no more than one or two steps; and
• a property with an over bath shower and possible use of bathing aids or adapted or capable of being adapted with a wet floor shower.

18. The Council accepted Miss Y was threatened with homelessness. It assessed her priority on the housing register as Band A.

December 2023: assessment of Miss Y’s homelessness application

19. The Council carried out a homelessness assessment. It recorded Miss Y had been told to leave the family property and was in priority need. It accepted it owed her the prevention duty.
20. It decided, the same day, to end the prevention duty. It noted this was because of work done to secure Miss Y’s return to the family home.
21. The Council told Miss Y:
1. it had accepted a duty to help prevent her from becoming homeless; and
2. it had ended this duty because it was satisfied she had suitable accommodation available for her occupation, and a reasonable prospect of having suitable accommodation available for at least six months, because:

• accommodation with friends or relatives had been secured through its actions for a short period of time to allow her to make a planned move to alternative accommodation; and
• there was a reasonable prospect she would have suitable accommodation for at least six months, because she had high priority banding on her housing register application.
3. she had the right to ask for a review of this decision within 21 days.

May 2024: Miss Y’s further homelessness application

22. Following a breakdown in the family relationship, Miss Y was made to leave the property immediately. She had nowhere else to stay and booked into a local hotel.
23. On 4 May, Miss Y sent an email to the Council asking for help with her situation. She said she was:

• now homeless and staying in a hotel;
• in Band A on the housing register and had physical and mental health issues; and
• running out of money and was worried. She asked whether the Council would fund the hotel accommodation and for information about what to do next.

24. The Council’s case notes show:

• 7 May and 9 May: Miss Y called and told it again she was homeless, staying in a hotel and running out of money;
• 23 May: Miss Y re-sent her email of 4 May, saying she had not received any response to her initial contact. She told the Council it should contact her by email if it could not contact her on her mobile phone.
• 23 May: it recorded a further call from Miss Y, that she was self-funding a hotel but running out of money, and an assessment should be booked.

June 2024: contact about the homelessness assessment

25. The Council told Miss Y, on 3 June, an advisor would contact her shortly to go through the assessment.
26. On 11 June, it recorded she needed an emergency homelessness assessment.
27. Miss Y called the Council on 14, 18 and 20 June chasing the assessment. An officer spoke to her on 20 June.
28. A telephone homelessness assessment was booked for 21 June. The Council’s case note says it was unable to contact Miss Y by phone to complete the assessment.
29. The case notes record the following calls from Miss Y:

• 21 June: she missed the assessment due to issues with the phone signal
• 24 June: about the missed assessment on 21 June
• 25 June: unhappy the assessment had not been re-arranged
• 26 June: chasing a call back
• 28 June: chasing the assessment. A call back was attempted but no answer
• 1 July: chasing the assessment
• 3 July: still waiting for a call about the assessment

5 July 2024: Miss Y’s homelessness assessment

30. The Council completed the homelessness assessment with Miss Y on 5 July.
31. The assessment noted she was self-funding hotel accommodation and running out of money. The Council accepted it owed Miss Y the prevention duty.
32. It confirmed this by letter on 5 July, and her right to request a review of this decision. It included her personal housing plan (PHP).

18 July 2024: The Council accepts the relief duty

33. On 15 July Miss Y complained to the Council about its handling of her homelessness and housing applications.
34. On 18 July the Council told Miss Y it had accepted it owed her the relief duty. It said it was satisfied she was eligible for help and homeless.

Miss Y’s contact about interim accommodation

35. On 19 July, Miss Y spoke to an officer about her accommodation needs.
36. She said the accommodation team were struggling to find her somewhere suitable because of her medical conditions, health and safety issues, and need to be in a specific location to access ongoing medical treatment.

The Council’s response to Miss Y’s complaint

37. In response to Miss Y’s complaint, the Council said:

• a housing advisor called to complete the booked homelessness assessment on 21 June but was unable to speak to her;
• the assessment was completed on 5 July. It had now accepted the relief duty; and
• she was provided with extensive advice on how to secure private rented accommodation on 19 July. She should contact its accommodation team if she needed emergency accommodation.

July to August 2024: Miss Y’s requests for interim accommodation

38. The Council’s records show Miss Y asked for help with interim accommodation on the following occasions;

• 23 July: worried about running out of money and no suitable interim accommodation available;
• 2 August: still homeless and self-funding the hotel accommodation with her money running out. Had contacted the emergency hub but interim accommodation options were unsuitable due to her medical needs. Asked if the Council could fund her stay at her current hotel accommodation which was close to her GP and hospitals;
• 6 August: she would run out of money for the hotel in September. She wanted to speak about accommodation options;
• 9 August: she could keep self-funding until September but may then need other accommodation;
• 19 August: she was running out of options;
• 19 August: asked about suitable accommodation options;
• 20 August: the Council told her there were no suitable private rented one-bedroom properties currently available as interim accommodation in her preferred area. She needed to be open to a wider area; and
• 30 August: asked about the availability of interim accommodation as she was running out of money.

Miss Y’s further contact about her complaint

39. On 27 August, Miss Y asked the Council about:

• the Council funding her current hotel accommodation; and
• the possibility of a direct let offer.

40. She said she would escalate her complaint if it did not reply.
41. In its response the Council said:

• temporary accommodation was a last resort when she had no available accommodation to occupy.
• she could ask about emergency accommodation at any time and the team would discuss the options. But, by its nature, this would be what was available on the day and likely to be hostel accommodation in her circumstances;
• it was unlikely the Council would agree to take over her current self-funded accommodation; and
• she would have to contact the housing team about a direct let offer.

11 September 2024: Council agrees to fund Miss Y’s hotel accommodation

42. Miss Y had a detailed discussion with a housing officer about her situation and accommodation needs. The case note confirms:

• Miss Y was advised of the accommodation available and that, if there was nothing suitable, they would look at an ad hoc booking, but this could be anywhere and not for a sustained period of time;
• Miss Y explained she needed to stay in the same area. Because of her medical conditions she needed to be close to her GP and hospitals for ongoing treatment and health care; and
• the officer said they would discuss her situation with managers.

43. The officer carried out a suitability check of Miss Y’s current hotel accommodation and:

• noted it was five minutes from her GP and near a bus route to her hospital;
• decided, based on this information, her current hotel was suitable compared to other hotel providers; and
• decided none of the Council’s internal provisions were suitable for Miss Y.

44. The officer told Miss Y the Council would now agree to fund her hotel accommodation.

30 September 2024: Council accepts the main housing duty

45. The Council accepted it owed Miss Y the main housing duty on 30 September.
46. It later (in November 2024) confirmed the offer of her hotel room as suitable temporary accommodation to meet the duty owed since 11 September 2024.

Direct let decision

47. On 10 September 2024 the Council recorded its decision to make Miss Y a direct offer of an adapted/adaptable property on one level because she had a medical recommendation for this type of property.
48. The Council told us, in response to the draft decision, as Miss Y had not been assessed as requiring a property with major adaptations, it had initially considered she was not eligible under that part of the policy for a direct let offer. But in response to her request in August 2023, it reviewed her circumstances and assessed her as eligible for a direct let.

The Council’s final complaint response

49. As a final response to Miss Y’s complaint the Council said:

• it was now funding her hotel accommodation. But it was likely she would be moved to a short-term placement, or long-term accommodation which would be detailed at the point of offer and based on suitability; and
• she was currently on the direct offer list for an adapted property with level access

November 2024: complaint to us

50. Miss Y was not satisfied with the Council’s responses to her complaint and brought it to us in November 2024.

Events from November 2024

51. The Council continued to fund Miss Y’s hotel as temporary accommodation.
52. She accepted the Council’s direct let offer of suitable social housing in April 2025.

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

a) delay assessing homelessness application and homelessness duties

53. I have found the following faults by the Council:
1. The Council failed to keep proper records of its actions in December 2023 when it decided to end the prevention duty. This is because;

• there is no information about the action it said was taken to secure accommodation for Miss Y. This means we can’t say whether the decision to end the duty was properly made.

This failure in record keeping was fault. But I don’t consider it caused Miss Y any injustice because the Council properly informed her of her right to request a review of its decision, which she did not take up.

2. The Council’s delay from 4 May to 5 July 2004 in assessing Miss Y’s homelessness application. This is because:

• Miss Y contacted the Council about her homelessness application on 4 May. She explained her situation and the urgency. Despite being recorded as needing an emergency assessment and Miss Y’s many calls about this, an appointment was not made until 21 June, nearly seven weeks later;
• Miss Y told the Council, in her email of 23 May, it should email if it was unable to contact her by phone (due to issues with the signal at her hotel accommodation). I appreciate the Council couldn’t contact Miss Y by phone for the assessment on 21 June. But it could have agreed another appointment time by email with Miss Y so she could arrange to be somewhere with a good signal for the call; and
• the Council then failed to complete the assessment until 5 July, a further delay of two weeks, despite Miss Y’s many calls about this.

I consider the delay of nearly nine weeks in completing Miss Y’s urgent homelessness assessment was fault. I have considered the impact of this on Miss Y below.

3. The Council’s failure, on 5 July, to properly consider all the information it had about Miss Y and her circumstances, when making the decision it owed her the prevention duty. This is because:

• it knew Miss Y was already homeless, having been made to leave the family home with no settled accommodation;
• there is no evidence it considered whether it owed the relief duty, instead of the prevention duty, because it was satisfied she was homeless;
• it had already decided Miss Y was in priority need; and
• there is no evidence it considered whether it owed the duty to provide her with interim accommodation because it had reason to believe she might be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need;

In my view it is more likely, had the Council properly considered the information, it would have decided on 5 July it owed Miss Y the relief duty and the duty to provide her with interim accommodation. This failure to do so was fault. I have considered the impact on Miss Y below.

b) failure to provide suitable interim accommodation

54. I have already decided the Council should have accepted it had a duty to secure interim accommodation for Miss Y on 5 July. But when it accepted it owed her the relief duty on 18 July, my view is it again failed to properly consider its duty to provide her with interim accommodation. This is because:

• there is no evidence of any suitability assessment of Miss Y’s interim accommodation needs;
• there is no evidence the Council actually checked the interim accommodation available at any specific time, either within its own provision or emergency hotel accommodation;
• there is no record of any specific offers of interim accommodation made to Miss Y, or of any suitable accommodation offered before September 2024; and
• it failed to properly consider all the information Miss Y had provided at the start of her homelessness application about her medical conditions and need to be in a certain location to attend medical appointments.

55. In my view, there was a complete failure by the Council to properly consider Miss Y’s individual circumstances and housing needs until September 2024.
56. It had all the relevant information from the start of her application. Had the Council properly engaged with Miss Y’s specific housing needs, it would have decided at the outset, as it finally did in September, to fund her current hotel accommodation as suitable interim accommodation on the basis it was unable to secure any other suitable accommodation for her.
57. Its failure to do so was fault. I have considered the impact on Miss Y below.

c) delay in agreeing to make a direct let offer

58. I do not consider there was fault by the Council in not deciding to make Miss Y a direct offer until September 2024. It initially considered she was not eligible for a direct offer under that part of its policy referring to major adaptations. But, in response to her request in August, and having reviewed her circumstances, it decided, in September, as it was entitled to do, she should be assessed as eligible for a direct let for an adapted/adaptable property on one level because she had a medical recommendation for this type of property.
59. But it failed to provide her with clear information about the criteria and process when she asked about the availability of disability adapted properties and direct offers on a number of occasions between April and August 2024.
60. I consider this failure was fault. This caused Miss Y uncertainty about the position regarding a direct offer.

Impact of the faults on Miss Y

61. Because of the delays and failures in assessing Miss Y’s homelessness application and in accepting the relief and interim accommodation duties:

• there was an avoidable delay in the Council deciding it owed Miss Y the relief and interim accommodation duties. Had her application been promptly assessed as an emergency, in my view the Council should have made these decisions by about 25 May 2024;
• the Council’s main housing duty decision was delayed. Although the decision was made within the appropriate timescale from the relief duty, this would have happened around two months earlier but for the previous delays. I don’t consider the delay with the main housing duty decision affected Miss Y’s housing register application because the Council had already agreed to make her a direct let offer; and
• Miss Y was caused avoidable frustration at having to chase the Council to progress her application and upset and uncertainty about the outcome at an already difficult and worrying time.

62. Because of the failure to provide suitable interim accommodation, Miss Y:

• had to pay for her own hotel accommodation until 11 September 2024; and
• was caused avoidable worry, upset and uncertainty about whether Council would fund her current hotel as suitable interim accommodation or provide her with a suitable alternative. And concern about what would happen if she ran out of money for the hotel.

63. Miss Y says she paid more than £12,000 for her hotel accommodation before the Council agreed to fund this in September 2024. In my view, but for its failures, the Council would have secured and funded the hotel accommodation for Miss Y as suitable interim accommodation from 25 May.
64. As a remedy for this injustice, the Council has now reimbursed Miss Y for the cost of her hotel accommodation from 25 May to 10 September 2024.

Conclusion

65. I have found:
1. fault with the Council’s record keeping for its December 2023 decision to end the prevention duty. This did not cause Miss Y any injustice;
2. the following faults by the Council, causing injustice:

• delay and failures in assessing Miss Y’s homelessness application and its homelessness duties;
• failure to provide Miss Y with suitable interim accommodation from May to until 11 September 2024; and
• failure to provide Miss Y with clear information about its direct let procedure.

66. In my view, Miss Y would have been spared a great deal of avoidable worry and uncertainty over more than four months, had the Council properly considered all the information provided about her health and circumstances, and engaged with her specific accommodation needs from the outset.
67. The Council has agreed to make the following service improvements following decisions by us in the last 12 months:
1. remind homelessness staff they should issue duty decision letters at each stage of the homelessness process and clearly record their thinking regarding the duties the Council owes, including consideration of the Council’s duty to provide interim accommodation; and
2. review its procedures for processing and recording homeless applications to ensure it meets its statutory duties and correctly records whether it owes a duty to provide interim accommodation.
68. But I am concerned the Council’s notes indicate officers do not always fully understand its duty to secure interim accommodation suitable for the applicant’s needs. So I have recommended a service improvement to address this.

Back to top

Action

69. 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; delay and failures in assessing her homelessness application and its homelessness duties; failure to provide Miss Y with suitable interim accommodation; and failure to provide clear information about its procedure for direct let offers. This apology should be in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology; and
2. pay Miss Y £350 to reflect the upset, worry, frustration and uncertainty caused by its failures. This is a symbolic amount based on our guidance on remedies:
70. And within three months from our final decision the Council has agreed to:
1. remind officers the duty to provide interim accommodation arises as soon as it has reason to believe an applicant may be eligible for assistance, homeless and in priority need;
2. ensure officers always carry out a suitability assessment to identify the applicant and their household’s needs before making a placement in interim or temporary accommodation;
3. remind officers of the need to make and retain records of contact with applicants about offers of interim accommodation and their response; and
4. review its policy and/or training to officers about its duty to secure suitable interim accommodation in accordance with Chapters 15, 16 and 17 of the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities.
71. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman