Summary: We have not investigated Mr Z’s complaint about the suitability of the temporary accommodation the Council arranged for Miss X when her family became homeless. That is because Miss X had a right to ask the Council to review its decision that the accommodation was suitable, and it was reasonable for her to have used that right. The Council was not at fault in how it dealt with Mr Z’s complaint about the accommodation.

The complaint

1. Mr Z complained about the temporary accommodation the Council arranged for Miss X and her family when they became homeless. Mr Z said the Council’s wider approach to homelessness is poor. Mr Z also complained the Council failed to carry out a suitably independent stage two investigation into his complaint.
2. Mr Z said the Council’s failings meant Miss X had to stay in unsuitable housing for too long, which was detrimental to her and her children. Mr Z thinks the Council’s approach to homeless accommodation is harmful to other residents in its area.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. 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)
5. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Homelessness accommodation

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. If a council is satisfied an applicant is unintentionally homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need it has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation. This is 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. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2). Councils must keep the suitability of accommodation under review.
11. Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability. (Housing Act 1996, section 202) If the Council’s review decides the accommodation is unsuitable, the Council must provide suitable accommodation immediately.

Complaints handling

12. The Council has a two stage complaints procedure which covers issues including homelessness accommodation. Its policy says that, at stage two, it will appoint an independent senior officer to review the complaint and that this will not be the same person who responded at stage one.

Temporary accommodation

13. Miss X and her family began having housing difficulties in early 2024. By mid-July 2024 they had become homeless and needed accommodation.
14. At that point, the Council moved Miss X into some temporary accommodation and sent her a letter setting out its offer of housing. The Council moved Miss X to different temporary accommodation in October and again sent a letter which detailed its housing offer. In March 2025, the end of the period I am investigating, the Council made further offers of temporary accommodation. It sent Miss X letters setting out its offers.
15. With each letter the Council told Miss X of her right to request a review of the accommodation’s suitability. Miss X did not ask for any reviews.

Finding

16. The Ombudsman does not normally investigate matters where a person can ask a council to review its decision. That is because there is or was a valid alternative route available to the person to obtain the outcome they want. Miss X had several opportunities to ask for a review to challenge the suitability of her temporary accommodation. She was aware of that right of review and it was reasonable for her to have used it. As a result, I will not investigate that part of Mr Z’s complaint.
17. Councils must keep the suitability of temporary accommodation under review. Miss X can ask for a review of her current housing if she feels it is not suitable for her family.

The Council’s wider approach to homelessness

18. Mr Z told us he has identified what he feels are systemic and ongoing issues with the Council’s homelessness service. It is clear Mr Z feels there needs to be oversight of the Council’s approach until it is improved.

Finding

19. While the Ombudsman has the power to make recommendations to improve a council’s practice, we do so based on consideration of individual complaints about personal injustice. We are not a regulator; we have no power to have ongoing oversight over a council’s service. We cannot achieve Mr Z’s desired outcome so we will not investigate this part of his complaint.

Complaints handling

20. Mr Z complained on Miss X’s behalf in December 2024. The Council responded at stage one in early January 2025 and at stage two a few weeks later. The Council’s stage two response came from a senior officer in one of its housing services.

Finding

21. Mr Z feels the Council’s complaints handling was poor because the person that responded at stage two was insufficiently independent. He says this was because they were in a management position within the housing department responsible for interim and temporary accommodation. The senior officer appointed to respond to a stage two complaint should have sufficient understanding of the issues to answer the complaint. This is likely to mean the officer is based in the department responsible for the matters complained about.
22. The senior officer was sufficiently independent from the matters Mr Z complained about on Miss X’s behalf, which was in accordance with its complaints policy and good administrative practice.

Back to top

Decision

23. I will not investigate parts of Mr Z’s complaint and the Council was not at fault in the part I have investigated.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman