Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to provide him with interim accommodation when he became homeless. We found the Council at fault for this, causing Mr X significant injustice as he had to sleep rough. We are satisfied the Council has taken appropriate and positive steps towards improvements in this area. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and make a symbolic payment to acknowledge his injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to provide interim accommodation for him when he became homeless in 2023 and accepting he was in priority need. As a result, he was street homeless which caused him significant difficulty for his wellbeing due to his vulnerabilities.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
4. 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)
5. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. Mr X complains of events from August to October 2023. As per Paragraph 4, this is a late complaint. However, we considered the extent of Mr X’s vulnerabilities, his unstable housing situation at the time and since, likely affecting communication with limited access to facilities. We decided to exercise discretion as there are good reasons why he did not make the complaint sooner, along with potential public interest issues. We are also satisfied despite the passage of time, there is sufficient evidence available to make a sound decision.
8. I am investigating up until the end of October 2023, events after this are outside my scope. This is when the Council made its decision about Mr X’s homelessness. Mr X exercised his statutory right of review with the decision and if he disagreed with the outcome, he had the right to appeal to the county court.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I discussed the complaint with Ms Y (acting on Mr X’s behalf as a representative) and considered her views and information she provided.
10. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its written responses and information it provided, as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. Ms Y and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and administrative background

Homelessness

12. A council must secure accommodation for applicants if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. This is called interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
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). Homeless applicants may request a review by the council within 21 days of the decision on their homelessness application. And if still dissatisfied, they can appeal to the county court on a point of law. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, chapter 19).

The Council’s Temporary Accommodation Policy

14. The Council’s policy covers interim placements under Section 188 of the Housing Act. Relevant to this complaint, it includes the following points:
• “For safeguarding purposes, the council will divulge any potential risk or safeguarding issues to the provider prior to placement. The provider is at liberty to refuse any placement”.
• “The council will do all that is reasonably possible to provide temporary accommodation. Where a referral to a provider is refused by the provider, the council will try other providers and contact other local authorities in the county. There may be occasions when the risk presented by the client means that no providers will accept a referral. In this situation, the council will continue to seek temporary accommodation as required under legislation”.

What happened – summary of key relevant events

15. Mr X has vulnerabilities with his physical and mental health.
16. At the start of August 2023, the probation service submitted a duty to refer form to the Council. It said Mr X would be homeless after being released late that month. The Council arranged to speak to Mr X twice to assess him for housing but experienced technical issues both times via video call. The probation service advised it made a referral for Community Accommodation (a service which provides temporary housing for prison leavers) but it had no availability.
17. The day after Mr X was released, the Council spoke to him on the phone. He did not have accommodation. It advised him it made referrals to all its temporary accommodation providers and they all declined on the grounds of risk.
18. In early September, the Council’s case notes said it again contacted several providers who all declined. It referred Mr X to all hostels on their listings, and updated him by voicemail.
19. In mid-September, the Council carried out an assessment on Mr X. It wrote to him accepting the relief duty.
20. In late September, the Council contacted the probation service about its views on the risk assessment it put together for Mr X and what it included. It asked probation for further information. It also asked if it identified any accommodation that would accept Mr X, to let it know.
21. The Council continued to contact, and follow up with, accommodation providers a few times; they all declined.
22. In early October, the Council spoke with Mr X around it trying to source interim accommodation for him and his potential risks. It later updated his risk assessment and sent this to providers.
23. In mid-October, the Council received a Letter Before Action about Mr X’s case. It said it had failed to comply with its s188 interim accommodation duty. It also raised concerns about the risk assessment it used for Mr X and part of its temporary accommodation policy (see Paragraph 14).
24. The next week, the Council formally responded:
• It did not dispute Mr X was in priority need, but issues with availability and the potential risk he posed affected its ability to perform its duty. It was doing all it could. It had a responsibility to disclose any potential risk the applicant may pose to its accommodation providers.
• It was satisfied with the accuracy of the risk assessment the probation service provided to it, which the Council passed to accommodation providers. It later requested additional information from the probation service. This led to an updated risk assessment which it passed on.
25. The Council also wrote to Mr X ending the relief duty to him at this point. It made the decision it did not owe Mr X the full housing duty as it deemed him to be intentionally homeless. The letter explained the Council’s rationale and reasoning for this decision in detail. Mr X requested a review of this.
26. In June 2024, a third party complained to the Council on Mr X’s behalf. The Council sent a similar response as it did above to the Letter Before Action. The Council later did not uphold his complaint at Stage 2 as it was satisfied with its actions in Mr X’s case.

The Council’s response to my enquiries

27. Ms Y raised concerns about wider implications of the Council’s inability to meet its s188 accommodation duty, and the extent it affected other vulnerable people. She noted the Council had previously discussed the significant challenges it faced in this area in high level meetings, including in July 2025.
28. In response to my enquiries, the Council said between April 2024 and April 2025, it had not been able to place 13 clients in temporary accommodation due to associated levels of risk.
29. The Council said it recognised the issues and had taken steps towards addressing these. It had created a team specifically to prevent and relieve homelessness among those leaving custody. The team focused on early intervention involving close partnership working with other agencies.
30. It had also found a temporary accommodation provider who could offer intensive support to clients with complex needs or higher risk profiles. The contract started in October 2025 and the Council was of the view it would address issues it had previously experienced with other providers refusing referrals.

Analysis

Duty to provide interim accommodation

31. The Council responded promptly to the probation service’s duty to refer form. I recognise technical issues meant it could not manage to speak to Mr X before his release. However, the Council accepted at the point of his release it had reason to believe Mr X was homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need. It therefore had a legal duty to provide interim accommodation while it carried out further enquiries.
32. The evidence shows the Council was in regular contact with the probation service, made various numerous and repeated efforts (including reaching out to other services) to find interim accommodation for Mr X. Despite this, it could not provide accommodation. While we accept and recognise the Council’s attempts, it had a statutory obligation to provide accommodation and it failed to do so. As explained in Paragraph 3, this is fault in the form of service failure.
33. This fault resulted in Mr X being deprived of accommodation for the period I am considering and he rough slept. In response to my draft decision, the Council did not believe this was evidenced as it did not receive reports from its rough sleeper team at the time. I have considered this. But without compelling evidence either way, on balance of probabilities given Mr X’s situation and circumstances, I consider it more likely than not that he rough slept during that period. This is significant injustice.
34. In line with our Guidance on Remedies, if someone has rough slept due to fault by a council, we will recommend a symbolic payment of between £300 to £1,000 per month. I have considered some relevant factors such as Mr X’s physical and mental vulnerabilities, and the start of colder weather setting in around the time. This has led to my recommendation of £500 per month to acknowledge this below.

Risk assessment and the Council’s policy

35. It is not fault for the Council to initially rely on the probation service’s risk assessment, which it promptly forwarded to providers in its search for accommodation. In the first instance, the probation service was best placed to outline Mr X’s history, assess risk and potential for re-offending. After continued difficulties in placing Mr X, the Council later considered Mr X’s concerns, revisited and amended the risk assessment. This is reasonable action to take at that point, and I do not find the Council at fault for this.
36. Despite the above, the Council points to Mr X’s potential risk as a barrier to finding accommodation. But this does not relieve the Council of its overall legal duty to provide interim accommodation, regardless of any perceived risk or not.
37. Following on from this, in Ms Y’s view, the Council’s policy at Paragraph 14 is not adequate. She says it fails to outline a plan if there are continued refusals by providers, leaving a vulnerable adult on the street, as happened in Mr X’s case. However, from our view, it is up to the Council how it meets this duty, whether using its own resources, from its usual providers or other sources. If it fails to do this, by whatever means it has used, then it is our role to highlight the fault by the Council and then assess the resulting personal injustice to the complainant (which I have done above).

Current actions by the Council

38. The Council has acknowledged the difficulties with accommodation placements for hard-to-place applicants. This may be due to various wider factors such as systematic pressures and high demand on limited resources.
39. I am satisfied the Council has taken these concerns on board and responded by taking proactive steps (see Paragraphs 29 to 30) towards improvement around the issues. This is positive action taken already, and on balance, for now I do not consider it necessary to recommend further service improvements.

Back to top

Agreed Action

40. To remedy the personal injustice set out above, the Council has agreed to carry out the following actions within one month of the final decision:
• Apologise to Mr X in writing for the injustice caused by its service failure to provide interim accommodation between August and October 2023 (in line with our guidance on making an effective apology); and
• Pay Mr X £1,000 as a symbolic payment to acknowledge his injustice for this.
41. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

42. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendations to remedy the injustice. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman