Summary: Miss X complained about the way the Council dealt with her homelessness application. We found fault in the Council’s delays to assess Miss X’s housing needs and provide her with interim accommodation as well as in the Council’s communication with her and its record-keeping. The Council’s fault caused injustice to Miss X. The Council has agreed to apologise, make symbolic payments and backdate the change in Miss X’s priority banding. The Council has also agreed to improve the way it keeps its housing records.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application. She says the Council delayed providing interim accommodation and accepting the main housing duty.
2. Miss X says the Council’s failings affected her mental and physical health. She and her baby had to sleep in her family and friends’ houses for many weeks, which was upsetting and strained her relationships. She was also frustrated by the Council’s lack of communication.

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. 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. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
6. 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.
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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. I have not investigated how the Council dealt with Miss X’s first homelessness application filed in March 2023. As explained in paragraph four we normally only look at the events which happened within 12 months from when the complainant came to us. Miss X came to us in February 2025, nine months after the Council issued its stage two complaint response. I have decided to investigate what happened from February 2024. I cannot see any good reasons to investigate earlier events. If Miss X was not happy about the Council’s actions following her first homelessness application, she should have complained to us sooner.
9. I have not investigated any events after 9 May 2024, when the Council provided its stage two response to Miss X’s complaint. We can only look at the events which the Council has already had a chance to review and respond to. If Miss X is unhappy about any events which happened after 9 May 2024, she would need to raise them with the Council first. I have looked, however, at Miss X’s continuing injustice caused by the Council’s failings in the period I have investigated.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

12. 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.

The relief duty and interim accommodation

13. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This is called the relief duty. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
14. A council must secure interim accommodation for an applicant and their household 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)
15. Examples of applicants in priority need include people with dependent children, pregnant women, people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems or disability, and victims of domestic abuse.
16. The relief duty ends when the applicant accepts or refuses an offer of accommodation which is suitable and likely to be available for at least 6 months, or, failing this, if 56 days have passed.

The main housing duty and temporary accommodation

17. 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 called the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
18. The accommodation a council provides until it can end the main housing duty is called temporary accommodation. If a council ends its interim accommodation duty but then goes on to accept the main housing duty, it still has a duty to provide temporary accommodation. Interim and temporary accommodation can be the same physical property. What changes is the legal duty under which a council provides it.
19. Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable has a statutory right to ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability within 21 days of being notified of the decision. (Housing Act 1996, section 202). There is no statutory right to review the suitability of interim accommodation.

What happened

Background

20. In February 2023 Miss X joined the Council’s social housing allocation scheme with the priority banding B.
21. At the end of March 2023 Miss X sent her homelessness application to the Council. The Council accepted its prevention duty at the beginning of May 2023. After discussing Miss X’s case with her parents the Council found out she could continue living with them for some time so it closed Miss X’s homelessness application.
22. Miss X gave birth to a child in June 2023.

Second homelessness application

23. In mid-November 2023 Miss X’s parents gave her a month’s notice to leave their property. From mid-December 2023 Miss X and her baby could not continue living with her parents. She stayed with family and friends a few nights at a time.
24. From November 2023 Miss X tried to contact the Council about her homelessness.
25. At the end of January 2024 Miss X talked to a housing team complaint officer.
26. After this call Miss X complained to the Council. She said the Council had misled her parents about the length of her stay in their property. She also complained she could not contact the Council about her homelessness since November 2023. As a result she sought help with various professionals and turned to the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB). She objected to the way the Council’s officer spoke to her at the end of January.
27. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint at the end of March 2024. It apologised for the delay in responding to her homelessness application submitted in March 2023. It did not uphold the remaining issues of Miss X’s complaint.
28. The Council made enquiries about where Ms X had been staying after she left the family home in December 2023 and requested relevant documents to support her homelessness application. The Council formally registered Miss X’s second homelessness application at the end of April 2024.
29. In the second week of May 2024 the Council sent its stage two complaint response to Miss X. It apologised for its delay in responding to Miss X’s correspondence about her homelessness after November 2023. The Council could not decide whether it owed Miss X a duty to provide accommodation as the investigation about her circumstances was ongoing and the Council needed more information from her. The Council did not uphold Miss X’s complaint about the way the housing team complaint officer carried out their telephone call with her.
30. At the same time the Council accepted its relief duty for Miss X and prepared her Personal Housing Plan. Two weeks later the Council offered her interim accommodation.
31. Miss X raised some concerns about the interim accommodation provided and the Council offered alternative accommodation in June, but Miss X refused it. Miss X accepted a further offer of alternative interim accommodation in early July. During the audit in mid-July 2024 Miss X did not raise any concerns about this property.
32. The Council accepted its main housing duty for Miss X in the third week of May 2025. At the beginning of August the Council re-assessed Miss X’s Housing Register application. Because it owed Miss X the main housing duty, the Council moved her from the priority banding B to the priority banding A with the effective date backdated to May 2025.

Analysis

33. For the reasons explained in paragraphs eight and nine I have only investigated what happened between February and May 2024.
34. If a council has reasons to believe a person may be homeless it has a duty to make inquiries and decide what, if any, further duty it owes.
35. By the beginning of February 2024 the Council knew that Miss X claimed to be homeless and could have a priority need. The Council delayed assessing her to decide on its relief duty and to find out whether it should arrange interim accommodation for her. This is fault.
36. If the Council carried out a timely assessment of Miss X’s housing and personal circumstances, it would have decided whether it owed Miss X any housing duties by the beginning of February 2024.
37. On the balance of probabilities I consider the Council’s decision would be to offer Miss X interim accommodation. This is because:
• this is what the Council decided in May, after it had assessed Miss X’s housing needs;
• Miss X’s circumstances did not change between January and May 2024.
38. The Council’s delay in making decision after Miss X’s second homelessness application caused her injustice as she had to seek shelter with friends and family. This meant that for many weeks she and her baby did not have stable and suitable living space. During the day she often had to vacate properties she was staying in. Miss X told us the need to stay with friends and family negatively affected her relationships. Because of her disability and health problems, the prolonged lack of suitable accommodation would have had a particularly negative effect on her.
39. If no accommodation is offered, the homelessness relief duty ends after 56 days from the date the council has accepted it. This is when the council should consider whether it still owes a housing duty to the homelessness applicant.
40. If the Council had accepted its relief duty for Miss X without delay, this duty would have ended by the end of March 2024 and at this point the Council would have considered whether it owed Miss X the main housing duty.
41. The Council accepted its main housing duty for Miss X in May 2025. On the balance of probabilities I consider that if the Council had made its decision in the spring of 2024, it would have accepted its main housing duty then. This is because Miss X’s housing circumstances relevant to the Council’s decision did not change between March 2024 and May 2025.
42. The Council’s delay of over 13 months to decide on its main housing duty for Miss X is fault. It caused Miss X injustice as after accepting its main housing duty for Miss X the Council changed her Housing Register priority banding from B to A. She was also distressed that she might have waited longer than necessary for an offer of permanent accommodation.
43. The Council also failed in the way it communicated with Miss X. Miss X spent much time contacting the Council’s homelessness team. She sought external help from her support network and CAB. The Council’s failure to consistently respond to her correspondence and address the issues she was raising is fault. It caused Miss X significant distress.
44. The Council failed to keep consistent records for Miss X’s homelessness application, which is fault. In our guidance notes “Principles of Good Administrative Practice” we explain that keeping proper records ensures councils are open and accountable.
45. The Council’s inconsistent record-keeping must have contributed to the delay in considering Miss X’s homelessness application. Miss X was distressed by the Council’s repeated requests for the same documents. It also made it more difficult to find out what happened in the case and thus to keep the Council accountable.

Service improvements

46. The Council told us it has undertaken steps to reduce backlogs in its housing decisions caused mainly by the difficulties with recruiting and keeping housing staff. The Council said it has now managed to significantly reduce staff vacancies.
47. Addressing staff shortages is likely to improve the Council’s communication with its service users. We will be monitoring service improvements through our casework.

Back to top

Action

48. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, we recommend the Council complete within four weeks of the final decision the following:
• apologise to Miss X for the injustice caused to her by the faults identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended;
• pay Miss X £1,500 to recognise her injustice caused by the Council’s delay in offering interim accommodation;
• backdate Miss X’s priority banding A to 31 March 2024;
• arrange a meeting or a telephone call with Miss X to discuss the best way to communicate to ensure there are no delays with the housing team responding to Miss X’s correspondence or contact;
• pay Miss X £1,000 to recognise the distress caused to her by the Council’s delay in deciding on its main housing duty for her and failing within its record keeping and to communicate with her effectively.

The Council will provide the evidence that this has happened.

49. We also recommend the Council within three months of the final decision review the way its housing team keeps its records to ensure all correspondence is recorded and easily accessible. The Council should provide us with evidence it has done so.

Back to top

Decision

50. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has accepted my recommendations, so this investigation is at an end.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman