London Borough of Hillingdon (25 000 228)
Category : Housing > Homelessness
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 13 Jul 2025
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his homeless case. He says the Council did not assess his complaint properly as it ignored his medical evidence that showed he was in priority need. This is because it was reasonable for him to have appealed to the county court.
The complaint
- Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his homeless case. He says the Council did not assess his case properly as it ignored his medical evidence that showed he was in priority need.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Mr X approached the Council as homeless in January 2025. Mr X provided information that he had been asked to leave the property he was living in. The Council accepted the relief duty.
- In February 2025, the Council wrote to Mr X with its decision that he was not in priority need and so there was no duty to provide him with interim accommodation. The Council’s letter details the evidence considered and rationale for the decision.
- In April 2025, the Council wrote to Mr X to advise its relief duty had ended and the decision that Mr X was not in priority need. Mr X was advised of his review rights.
- Mr X requested a review in March 2025. The Council completed its review in June 2025 which confirmed the decision that Mr X was not in priority need. The Council’s letter again details the evidence considered and the rationale for the decision. The Council advised Mr X of his right to appeal.
- Mr X has not provided any evidence to suggest it was unreasonable for him to have appealed to the county court. Therefore, we will not exercise discretion to investigate the complaint as it was reasonable for Mr X to use his right of appeal.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it was reasonable for him to have appealed to the county court.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman