Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to end its legal duty to provide the complainant accommodation on account of his homelessness. This is because the Council’s decision carries a right of review which the complainant could reasonably request. We will also not investigate any alleged failure to provide the complainant with evidence of allegations made about her which led to her eviction. This is because the complainant could reasonably complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office which a better placed body to consider such matters.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Miss X) complains the Council wrongly ended its legal homelessness duty to provide her and her family with accommodation due to false allegations which resulted in her being evicted from her prior accommodation. She says the Council has not provided her with the evidence which supports the allegations made against her.
2. In summary, Miss X says the alleged fault has had a significant and adverse impact on her mental health. She also says this has made her family more vulnerable. As a desired outcome, Miss X wants the Council to provide him with evidence proving the allegations made against her which resulted in her and her family’s eviction.

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. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council’s decision to end the main housing duty for Miss X carries a right of review under section 202 of the Housing Act 1996. The information provided to us by Miss X shows she has been informed of her review right, though there is no evidence to suggest she has requested a review from the Council. We do not normally investigate complaints where review rights apply unless it would be unreasonable to expect a complainant to request a review. In my view, there is no evidence that it would not be reasonable to expect Miss X to request a review from the Council. This is the process Parliament intended people in Miss X’s situation to use when it enacted the relevant legislation.
7. With respect to Miss X’s desired remedy that the Council provide her with the evidence it considered in relation to the allegations made about her, this would be a data protection and information access matter. If Miss X wants to know what personal information the Council holds about her, she can make a subject access request to the Council under the Data Protection Act 2018. If she is dissatisfied with the Council’s handling and/or compliance with any subject access request she makes, she can make a complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office which handles complaints about data protection and information access concerns. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to investigate such matters when the complainant could reasonably take such matters to a better placed body.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the restrictions I outline at paragraphs three and four (above) apply.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman