Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discharge its homelessness following Mr X’s refusal of an offer of accommodation which it considered to be suitable. It was reasonable for him to use the appeal procedure offered under the Housing Act 1996 following the Council’s rejection of his s.202 review.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to discharge its homelessness duty and end his temporary accommodation after he was made an offer of accommodation which he believed was unsuitable for his needs. He says he now faces being homeless on the streets with his daughter if no further offer is made.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X was accepted by the Council as homeless under the main housing duty in 2023. On the Council’s housing register he was awarded Band A for homelessness and its banding letter advised that he would be made one reasonable offer under this priority, if it was refused the priority would be lost.
6. In November 2024 the Council made Mr X a direct offer of a 2-bedroom flat. He decided to refuse the offer because he believed it was unsuitable for his needs. The Council then advised him that it was discharging its homelessness duty because he had refused a suitable offer of accommodation. Mr X asked the Council to review its decision that the offer was suitable under s.202 of the Housing act 1996 Part 7.
7. The review was carried out in February 2025 and it upheld the original decision that the offer was suitable. Mr X argued that the accommodation he was in was affecting his health and his daughter’s mental health. The Council took into account the medical evidence he provided but did not consider it was good reason to refuse an offer which removed him from the temporary accommodation situation.
8. The Council told Mr X that it was ending its duty to provide temporary accommodation following the discharge of the homelessness duty. The Council’s review letter advised Mr X of his right to appeal the decision to the County Court within 21 days.
9. We cannot overturn a council’s decision on a homelessness application. Provided it has followed the review procedure correctly it is reasonable for someone to challenge the decision by way of an appeal to the court.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discharge its homelessness following Mr X’s refusal of an offer of accommodation which it considered to be suitable. It was reasonable for him to use the appeal procedure offered under the Housing Act 1996 following the Council’s rejection of his s.202 review.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman