Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s actions when she approached it as homeless. We find the Council at fault for failing to respond to her contact, sending a decision letter to an address it knew she no longer lived at, and failing to consider her homelessness in October 2024. As a result, Miss X missed the opportunity to seek a review of the Council’s decision and was left with uncertainty about the support she may have been entitled to. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X and improve its services.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s actions when she approached it as homeless. Specifically, she says the Council:
1. failed to provide her with adequate support;
2. communicated with her poorly; and
3. breached her confidentiality by sending a letter and carrying out an unannounced visit to a previous address.
2. Miss X says these actions resulted in the loss of one of her jobs and forced her to move in with an ex-partner, where she is experiencing domestic abuse.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
5. 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

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

Relevant legislation and guidance

Homelessness

8. 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.
9. 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)
10. It is not reasonable for a person to continue to live in accommodation if it is probable this will lead to violence or domestic abuse against them. (Housing Act 1996, Section 177)

Application

11. If someone contacts a council seeking accommodation or help to obtain accommodation and gives ‘reason to believe’ they ‘may be’ homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, the council has a duty to make inquiries into what, if any, further duty it owes them. The threshold for triggering the duty to make inquiries is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular department of the council. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)
12. Councils can suggest alternative solutions in cases of potential homelessness where these would be suitable and acceptable to the applicant. However councils must not do this to avoid their legal duties, especially the duty to make inquiries into the applicant’s homelessness. The Ombudsman has criticised councils for ‘gatekeeping’ practices, for example, failing to take a homelessness application at the earliest opportunity.
13. 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)

Priority need

14. 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)
15. 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.

Domestic abuse

16. If a council has reason to believe an applicant may be homeless as a result of domestic abuse, it should make interim accommodation available to the applicant immediately whilst it undertakes its investigations. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 21.25)
17. The Council should try to get an account of the applicant’s experience to assess whether the behaviour they have experienced is abusive or whether they would be at risk of domestic abuse if they continued to occupy their accommodation. The authority should support the victim to outline their experience and make an assessment based on the details of the case. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, Chapter 21)

What happened

18. In April 2024, Miss X contacted the Council after she was asked to leave her family home. She told the Council that she was homeless and sleeping in her car.
19. The Council assessed that Miss X was not in priority need, so did not offer her interim accommodation. It provided her with information about local shelters and referred her to a homeless charity as well as another organisation to verify her homelessness.
20. That night, Miss X contacted the Council’s out-of-hours service for help. The Council attempted to call her back several times, but she did not answer. The following day, the Council reiterated that it would not provide interim accommodation because she was not in priority need, and confirmed once it had verified her as homeless it would start its relief duty and create a personalised housing plan with her.
21. Over the next few days, the Council tried to contact Miss X’s mother for more information, but did not receive a response. A homeless organisation and a charity visited Miss X. They were unable to confirm her homelessness but gave her advice on managing her income and debts. The charity advised her that due to her income, she would be liable for full rent, which she said she could not afford.
22. Miss X told the Council she was finding it difficult to continue working while sleeping in her car and asked for further help. She did not receive a response to this or later follow-up contact.
23. In May, the Council sent a letter to Miss X’s previous address explaining it was closing her case as it could not verify her as homeless. The letter advised if she disagreed with the decision, she could request a review.
24. In October, Miss X complained to the Council. She said when she contacted it for support, she was told she would be temporarily housed but was not, leaving her to sleep in her car. She said she had made calls and sent emails but did not receive a response and explained that, because of the situation, she had moved in with an ex-partner. She described this relationship as abusive and said she remained there for three months before leaving due to the impact on her mental health. She was homeless again.
25. In response, the Council visited Miss X’s previous address. Her mother said Miss X had moved out years ago but occasionally returned. The Council did not uphold her complaint. It said Miss X was informed during her initial contact that she was not eligible for interim accommodation and was signposted to other services for support. It noted the out-of-hours officer attempted to contact her several times but received no response. The following day, her housing officer advised it would not have been able to provide her with any further support. The Council added that Miss X’s housing officer went on maternity leave in May, and any emails sent after this would have received an out-of-office reply with alternative contact details. It confirmed there was no record of any calls or emails from Miss X thereafter and that a decision letter had been sent to her last known address, but no response was received.
26. In December, Miss X escalated her complaint. She said she was offered a referral to a homeless organisation with the understanding she would be taken to a shelter that night which did not happen. She said she had not received any out-of-office replies to her emails and raised the Council had sent the decision letter to an old address she no longer lived at, despite there being other available ways to contact her.
27. In January 2025, the Council issued its final response. It maintained that there was no reason to believe Miss X was in priority need and it had acted appropriately based on the information available at the time. The Council confirmed the letter had been sent to the last address it held for her and said the recent unannounced visit was carried out to verify her homelessness. The Council told Miss X if she remained dissatisfied, she could take her complaint to the Housing Ombudsman.

My findings

Homelessness in April

28. When Miss X contacted the Council and provided details of her situation, the Council had reason to believe she may be homeless, therefore triggering the duty to make enquiries and decide what, if any, further duty it owed her. It assessed her circumstances and decided that she was not in priority need. It provided her with advice, guidance, and signposted her to relevant support services. The Council is not required to provide interim accommodation to people who are not in priority need. I find no fault in the Council’s decision at that time.
29. However, Miss X did not receive responses to several emails she sent to her housing officer before the officer went on maternity leave. This lack of communication is fault and left Miss X without support at a critical time.
30. The Council later issued a decision letter regarding Miss X’s homelessness but sent it to her previous address. Although this was not a breach of confidentiality, it was fault. The Council knew Miss X no longer lived at that address and should have used her most recent method of contact – email. As a result, Miss X did not receive the letter and therefore missed the opportunity to request a review of the decision.
31. The letter was sent after Miss X’s housing officer went on maternity leave, and no further contact was received from Miss X. However, there is no evidence the new housing officer attempted to follow up or re-establish contact before closing the case. This is fault. The new officer should have made further enquiries to understand Miss X’s situation. Since then, the Council has introduced a new process where if there is no contact from an applicant, a senior officer will now review the case before any closure decision is made. This is a positive improvement, and I make no further recommendations on this point.

Homelessness in October

32. When Miss X submitted her complaint in October, she provided new information which gave the Council reason to believe she may be homeless, eligible for assistance, and in priority need. At that point, the Council had a duty to provide her with interim accommodation while it carried out further inquiries. It failed to do so. This is fault.
33. Although the Council visited Miss X’s previous address in response to her complaint, it made no direct attempt to contact Miss X or consider her homelessness further. This is fault. While I cannot say, even on the balance of probabilities, whether the Council would have ultimately found Miss X to be in priority need, the failure to assess her properly creates uncertainty about what support she may have been entitled to.
34. The Council has acknowledged that it focussed solely on addressing her complaint and failed to consider whether it should re-open Miss X’s homeless application. It accepts that it should have used the information in the complaint to consider whether it owed her a relief duty.
35. As a result, the Council has amended its complaints process. It now requires an independent senior officer to assess whether a homelessness application should be opened based on the issues raised in the complaint. This will then be considered alongside the complaint by a separate senior officer. This is a positive improvement, and I make no further recommendations on this point.
36. During my investigation, I asked the Council to contact Miss X and assess her current situation. Since October, she has not had a stable place to live and has been staying between friends, a family member, and her ex-partner. It has since provided her with interim accommodation, accepted the relief duty, created a personalised housing plan, and offered advice and signposting to other organisations. The Council continues to work with her to progress her application and make further inquiries.
37. The Council has also proposed a remedy: a written apology and a payment of £500 to recognise the impact of its failings. It will continue to provide interim accommodation while assessing whether she has priority need. I have considered this in line with our Guidance on Remedies and am satisfied this is a suitable and proportionate response. I do not recommend any additional remedies.

Complaint response

38. In its final response to Miss X’s complaint, the Council incorrectly referred her to the Housing Ombudsman. This is fault. However, it did not cause Miss X a significant injustice, as she correctly brought her complaint to us.

Back to top

Action

39. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults, within four weeks of the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to: 
• apologise to Miss X in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology;
• pay Miss X its proposed remedy of £500; and
• remind relevant staff that complaints about the homelessness service should be directed to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and amend any letter templates.
40. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman