Summary: Miss X complained the Council did not respond properly to her homelessness. She also complained about how it handled her housing allocation. The Council was at fault. The Council delayed carrying out work to Miss X’s accommodation and wrongly suspended her from bidding on its housing register. The Council will review its policy, apologise to Miss X and make a symbolic payment to her.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about how the Council handled her homelessness when she fled domestic abuse with her child. She complained her and her child have been left in unsuitable temporary accommodation by the Council. 
2. Miss X also complained about her housing allocation. She said the Council did not consider her experiences of domestic abuse, violence, and her medical needs.
3. Miss X said the ongoing fault by the Council has caused her great distress and her mental health has worsened drastically. 

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. 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)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
6. Section 26D of the Local Government Act 1974 gives us the power to investigate matters coming to our attention during an investigation if we think a member of the public has or may have suffered an injustice as a result.
7. 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

8. Miss X made a homelessness application in October 2023. The Council conducted an assessment in November 2023. It decided about her homelessness in December 2023.
9. Miss X used her right to appeal about the decision made by the Council in December 2023 about her homelessness. The following decision made by the Council as part of the review resolved one of Miss X’s complaint points. I have not considered this period.
10. Miss X complained to the Ombudsman in December 2024.
11. Miss X also used her right to appeal a decision made by the Council in December 2024. The Council decided on suitability of temporary accommodation in January 2025. Around the same time, the Council overturned its decision about ending is main housing duty to her. I have not considered this period.
12. I have investigated January 2024 – December 2024.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

13. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
14. 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

15. As part of its response to my formal enquiries, the Council shared its:
• Procedure for Applicants Fleeing Domestic Abuse,
• Housing Allocations Scheme.
16. 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.
17. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them and anyone who lives with them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
18. 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)
19. 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)
20. 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;
• giving notice to bring the relief duty to an end;
• the conditions for referral to another authority are not met so the notifying housing authority owes the main housing duty;
• 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.

21. 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)
22. Examples of applicants in priority need are:

• people with dependent children;
• pregnant women;
• people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems, disability or old age;
• care leavers; and
• victims of domestic abuse.

23. 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)
24. 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))
25. An allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants in the following categories:

• homeless people;
• people in insanitary, overcrowded or unsatisfactory housing;
• people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds;
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others;
  (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(3))

26. Councils must notify applicants in writing of the following decisions and give reasons:

• that the applicant is not eligible for an allocation;
• that the applicant is not a qualifying person;
• a decision not to award the applicant reasonable preference because of their unacceptable behaviour.

27. The Council must also notify the applicant of the right to request a review of these decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))
28. Housing applicants can ask the council to review a wide range of decisions about their applications, including decisions about their housing priority.
29. A MARAC is a meeting where agencies share information on high-risk domestic abuse cases. The meetings can include representatives from the police, health, child protection, housing, probation and other relevant specialists. The MARAC provides a plan to safeguard the adult victim.

What happened here

30. The following is a list of key events about the matters investigated. It is not a list of everything that happened.
31. Miss X has physical and mental health needs. She lives with her young child. Her experiences of violence and domestic abuse date back many years. In the months leading up to January 2024 Miss X shared evidence with the Council about her medical needs, and her experiences of violence. Due to having concerns around suitability, Miss X had not accepted an offer of interim accommodation from the Council, in January 2024. She had moved between her tenancy and family properties.
32. In January the domestic abuse Miss X was being subject to, was discussed at MARAC. One of the outcomes of the MARAC was for the Council to re-house Miss X as soon as possible.
33. The Council’s medical advisor considered suitability of the accommodation the Council offered Miss X. It reviewed information from medical professionals and Miss X’s own disclosures.
34. It advised the Council Miss X should only be offered 1st floor accommodation without a lift. If higher than 1st floor accommodation, it must have lift access.
35. Miss X complained to the Council about a property the Council offered her. She said it was unsuitable because of:
• her physical and mental health needs,
• the area putting Miss X at risk of further violence, and
• the distance from her support network.
36. Miss X said the Council discriminated against her because it ignored the above points.
37. At the end of January, the Council made its response to Miss X at stage one of its complaint procedure. The offer of accommodation was withdrawn because of the suitability assessment carried out by the Councils medical advisor. It did not uphold the complaint about the Council discriminating against Miss X. It said the Council did not expect applicants fleeing domestic abuse to have a local connection to an area, and it would work to find suitable accommodation for her and her child.
38. In February Miss X accepted an offer of interim accommodation for her and her child.
39. The Council sent a letter to Miss X telling her it accepted a main housing duty to her. The accommodation became temporary accommodation.
40. Through February and March, the Council repeatedly told Miss X she would not be able to bid on Council properties until she gave up her social housing tenancy. The Council suspended her account on its housing register.
41. In March Miss X complained to the Council about this. Miss X said it was not in Council policy or procedure that she had to do this. She said she had a lot of belongings and moving them into storage would be an issue.
42. The Council said it offered Miss X free storage for her belongings, which she accepted.
43. In April the Council made a stage one complaint response to Miss X. The Council did not uphold Miss X’s complaint. It referred to the instruction it gave her to end her existing tenancy as ‘long established practice.’
44. Miss X asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage two of its complaint procedure.
45. In May it responded at stage two of its complaint procedure. It said the complaint was not upheld. The Council told Miss X it would amend its housing allocations scheme to reflect the guidance it had given her, but that her account was suspended until she gave up her existing tenancy.
46. At the end of September, the Council’s medical advisor assessed whether Miss X should be awarded medical banding, and about whether properties could be higher than ground floor.
47. It decided no medical banding should be awarded. It decided any floor with a lift would be acceptable but that a property with internal stairs should not be offered to Miss X.
48. In October Miss X wrote to a senior officer at the Council to express her concern about the condition of the temporary accommodation (including problems with mould and damp) and her homelessness.
49. The Council quickly organised for a visit to the property to assess the mould and damp reported by Miss X.
50. Miss X continued to contact Council. She said it failed to consider her medical evidence properly. She also reported she felt at risk in her property. She shared specific information relating to the domestic abuse with the Council.
51. The Council responded to Miss X. The Council explained the options available to Miss X to address the repair issues, and her concerns about safety. It confirmed with Miss X that her location was not compromised. It offered Miss X a move to a different temporary accommodation to try to alleviate her concerns.
52. Miss X wrote back to the Council. She told it she had been diagnosed with a fungal condition. She said two other residents at the temporary accommodation had also been diagnosed with the same condition. She outlined her needs again. She refused the offer of a move to different temporary accommodation. She said this was because the temporary accommodation was very similar to where she was staying, and it was not a resolution. The Council invited Miss X to share more medical evidence with it. It invited her to contact it by a certain date should she change her mind about the move. It said it would follow up about the fungal condition.
53. At the start of November, a damp and mould inspection took place in the property.
54. In mid-November the Council upgraded Miss X’s extractor fan. It started to organise the bathroom floor replacement.
55. At the end of November Miss X was placed into Band B of the Council’s housing allocations scheme. The Council’s medical advisor decided any property offered to Miss X should also be self-contained.
56. At the start of December Miss X complained to the Council.
57. She complained about decisions made by the re-housing team about her housing need, and the information about her medical needs being disregarded.
58. Another damp and mould assessment took place in the property early December.
59. Miss X complained to the Ombudsman in mid-December.

My findings

Suitability of Accommodation

60. The suitability of temporary accommodation was considered as part of a formal appeal. However, the Council made a response to my formal enquiries about how it allocates temporary accommodation. It said its new temporary accommodation policy is currently in development. This is the first policy of its kind for the Council. This is welcomed by the Ombudsman.
61. Miss X first reported a problem with damp and mould in October 2024. A few days later a surveyor visited the accommodation. The Council said an assessment was made, and action agreed.
62. About a week later another inspection took place. The Council said this inspection was of the bathroom area. The Council determined there was damp in the bathroom, and a new floor was needed. A month after that a full damp and mould inspection took place. The Council said it did not make a full assessment sooner, as Miss X declined this. The Council case records correlate with this account.
63. We would expect timely action to be taken by the Council. We would expect the Council to consider whether the disrepair was bad enough that it required Miss X and her child to be accommodated elsewhere while it carried out the necessary work. In complaint responses made by the Council to Miss X, the Council said it discussed the condition of the disrepair with the property management company, and that they considered the accommodation habitable, while work was carried out. The notes made at the time of the assessments of the issues, between October – December 2024 correlate with this account.
64. The Council shared evidence with us of it offering a move in temporary accommodation, to Miss X, despite this. It offered the move at the end of October 2024. Miss X declined the offer. It was her right to do so. She said she wanted to wait for a permanent offer of housing.
65. The action taken by the Council to assess the disrepair was timely, however the work was not completed in full until four months later. The issue with the bathroom floor caused Miss X great distress. She told us she bathed her child in the sink in the kitchen, because the floor was dangerous.
66. The Council said the four-month delay in replacing the floor was due, in part, to Miss X denying access to the accommodation. Council case records show that the first reason for delay in replacing the bathroom floor was when a contractor cancelled the job. At the end of November, the Council chased this up.
67. Council case records also show contractors were unable to gain access to Miss X’s accommodation, on 5 occasions, between October and March. However, these appointments were not organised to replace the bathroom floor. They were to attend to other issues such as an extractor fan being replaced.
68. I find fault with the Council for delay in completing the necessary work in Miss X’s accommodation to address the damp and mould. Miss X said she was without access to a functioning bathing facility during this time and was afraid the bathroom floor would collapse.

Housing Allocation

69. Miss X complained about her banding being incorrect. She said the Council disregarded evidence provided to it by medical professionals and evidence she submitted personally.
70. It is not our role to decide which banding the Council should have awarded Miss X. Miss X believed her medical needs meant she should have been placed in a higher banding than she was.
71. The evidence shows the Council repeatedly considered Miss X’s reports about her medical needs. This included the specific points argued by Miss X. I do not find fault with how the Council considered medical evidence and decided on Miss X’s priority band.
72. Once it accepted main housing duty in February 2024, the Council told Miss X she needed to end her tenancy before she could start bidding on properties. This was fault by the Council. Miss X only needed to end her tenancy before being offered another property (Hammia V London Borough of Wandsworth [2005] EWHC 1127 (Admin)).
73. The Council should have given Miss X advice and information to support her to make an informed decision about when to end her tenancy. It should not have withdrawn her access to bid on its properties.
74. When asked about this course of action, the Council said it was not written into any Council policy or procedure, but it was usual practice. It said it was in response to the property being unsafe for Miss X to remain there, and the property would be better used for someone else who needed it.
75. The Council should not enforce any sort of practice unless it is in a relevant policy or procedure. In a complaint response to Miss X the Council said it would amend its housing allocations scheme in consideration of this issue. The Council may want to carefully consider the court’s decision (Hammia V London Borough of Wandsworth [2005] EWHC 1127 (Admin)) and the implications of this, in doing so.
76. The Council has a duty to give reasonable preference to homeless people. It is an expectation in government guidance that councils do not introduce qualification criteria which would exclude all or most of a group who would otherwise have reasonable preference.
77. I find fault with the Council for withdrawing Miss X’s access to its housing register for four months, from February to May 2024. Miss X’s situation is not yet resolved, and I am unable to determine whether she would have been offered a property sooner, had she had access during this time. However, this fault exasperated matters for Miss X, at an already difficult time. It resulted in her having to wait longer than she should to start bidding on properties. The rationale for the action, on the part of the Council, was flawed.

Policy and Procedure – domestic abuse

78. As part of this investigation the Council shared its procedure for homeless applicants fleeing domestic abuse. It outlines steps Council officers should take when delivering services to applicants who have suffered domestic abuse. The first stage the Council describe is when an applicant is seen by a triage officer.
79. The procedure says:
• A triage officer needs to get personal documents from an applicant,
• Applicants need to provide ‘proof they are fleeing’ domestic abuse, in the form of supporting evidence from police, GP or support agency, for example,
• If they do not have evidence available, the local authority needs them to make ‘a sworn statement/affidavit, witnessed by a Solicitor detailing the abuse that they have suffered. There is a fee for this service, and this cost needs to be paid by the client’. The procedure says the Council will consider paying for the service, if an applicant has proof they cannot afford to pay it.
• Applicants need to provide the personal documentation within 14 days should they not have it available on the day they are fleeing.
80. These steps conflict with the Homelessness Code of Guidance (the code).
81. The code says local authorities have a duty to secure interim accommodation for an applicant, if they have reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need. For applicants fleeing domestic abuse, interim accommodation should be provided, while the Council undertake its enquiries into the situation.
82. According to the Council’s procedure, interim accommodation is not offered to victims of domestic abuse, unless they have provided personal documentation to it. The code directly addresses personal documents (21.31). It says local authorities should work with partner agencies to ensure documentation can be recovered safely from the address they have fled from. The procedure outlined by the Council puts pressure on an applicant to provide documentation at the point of approach. It creates a barrier to accessing interim accommodation, should an applicant have fled, without any identification. While it is understandable the Council wants to verify an individual’s identification, an immediate lack of documentation should not be a barrier to receiving the necessary help.
83. The Council’s approach to obtaining information about an applicant’s experience of abuse also does not align with guidance set out in the code. The Council procedure says, in the absence of corroborative evidence from a partner agency, a victim is expected to make ‘a sworn statement/affidavit, witnessed by a Solicitor detailing the abuse that they have suffered’. This approach is disproportionate. It is likely to be highly distressing for a survivor, especially at the time of presenting to the Council as homeless.
84. Chapter 21.24 of the code explains for some people, evidence of the abuse may not be available, for example, because there were no adult witnesses and/or the applicant was too frightened or ashamed to report incidents to agencies such as the police. It notes the applicant may be disclosing their experiences to the Council for the first time. It concludes “[h]ousing authorities should not have a blanket approach toward domestic abuse which requires corroborative or police evidence to be provided”.
85. The Council’s procedure conflicts with the Homelessness Code of Guidance. This is statutory guidance, and councils must have regard to it. Any departure from the code should be case specific and recorded in writing. The approach taken by the Council in its procedure is fault. It is likely this approach creates unnecessary barriers for victims of domestic abuse in seeking help and staying safe.
86. As part of this investigation, I made further formal enquiries of the Council using our powers under section 26D of the Local Government Act 1974. I asked the Council questions about its use and application of the procedure, and the wider impact for homeless applicants fleeing domestic abuse in the Council area.
87. The Council provided a thorough response. It shared with the Ombudsman a revised procedure that did not include the points of concern listed above. It showed proper consideration for the Homelessness Code of Guidance, 2018.

Action

88. To remedy the injustice caused to Miss X, by fault of the Council, it should take the following action within four weeks of receiving a final decision:
• Apologise to Miss X in line with our guidance on Making an Effective Apology. 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, and
• Make a symbolic payment of £300 to Miss X to recognise the distress caused by suspending access to the housing register and the delay in completing work in her accommodation.
89. Within 12 weeks of receiving a final decision the Council should:
• Share learning from this decision with the homelessness service,
• Review its housing allocations scheme to ensure it is acting appropriately when providing guidance to applicants about ending tenancies, and
• Communicate changes made to policy and procedure, to its staff as necessary.
90. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman